The effect of nonweight-bearing exercise and protocol adherence on diabetic foot ulcer healing: a pilot study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Innovative approaches to the prevention and treatment of foot wounds in persons with diabetes mellitus are needed and preliminary research suggests that exercise therapy may increase joint mobility and blood flow. A 12-week, prospective, quasi-experimental pilot study was conducted to evaluate the potential influence of nonweight-bearing ankle exercises, and adherence to same, on the size of neuropathic, diabetic foot wounds in community-dwelling older adults. Nineteen patients were recruited. Of those, 10 (88.9% men) were randomized to ankle exercise treatments and nine (50% men) continued their previous care regimen. Patients randomized to the exercise program were younger and had smaller wounds than those in the control group (average age 62.2 ± 8.54 versus 74.25 ± 16.25 years and measurement 0.94 cm2 ± 1.89 versus 2.53 cm2 ± 3.647, respectively). Thirty percent (30%) of the patients in the exercise and 33.3% in the control group healed. The percent wound reduction between groups was not significantly different (Mann Whitney U test, P = .696). Adherence to the recommended exercise program was variable but 70% performed some exercises. The results of this pilot study provide important lessons for future studies, including the need to enroll more patients and provide more exercise guidance. Considering the increasing prevalence of diabetes mellitus and resultant complications, as well as the potential benefits of this non-invasive treatment regimen, larger studies are warranted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".