Wound healing outcomes in a diabetic foot ulcer outpatient clinic at an acute care hospital: a retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) have an increased risk of lower extremity amputation. A retrospective chart review of patients with DFUs attending the Foot Treatment and Assessment chiropodist-led outpatient clinic at an inner-city academic hospital was conducted to determine wound healing outcomes and characteristics contributing to outcomes. METHOD: We reviewed the complete clinical history of 279 patients with 332 DFUs spanning over a five-year period. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 61.5±12.5 years and most patients (83.5%) had one DFU. The majority of wounds (82.5%) were in the forefoot. Overall, 267/332 (80.5%) wounds healed. A greater proportion of wounds healed in the forefoot (82.5%) and midfoot (87.1%) than hindfoot (51.9%; p<0.001). Using a logistic regression model, palpable pedal pulse and use of a total contact cast were associated with better wound healing. CONCLUSION: Our findings are the first to demonstrate the benefits of chiropodists leading an acute care outpatient clinic in the management of DFUs in Canada and delivers wound healing outcomes equivalent to or exceeding those previously published.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".