MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412535126 · doi:10.2196/73187

Exploring the Value of Continuous Plantar Temperature Monitoring for Diabetic Foot Health Management: Observational, Prospective Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4412535126 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maryam Hajizadeh, Emily Matijevich, Evan Minty, Brock Liden

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintFoot (prosody)Diabetic footProspective cohort studyMedicinePhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationDiabetes mellitusPsychologyComputer scienceArtSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a life-changing complication of diabetes. There is increasing evidence that remote plantar temperature monitoring can reduce the recurrence of DFUs. Monitoring of foot temperature once a day is the current guideline for identifying early signs of foot inflammation. However, single readings of physiological signals can increase the risk of misdiagnosis when the signals fluctuate throughout the day. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether intraday temperature asymmetry signals were stable or varied as a function of time in individuals at risk of DFUs. Methods: In total, 64 participants with diabetes (mean age 68, SD 13.8 y) were provided with multimodal sensory insoles (Orpyx Sensory Insoles) to monitor continuous temperature data at a frequency of once per minute at 5 plantar locations in a 90-day study window. The augmented Dickey-Fuller test was used to determine whether the temperature asymmetry signals were stationary (ie, indicating constant mean and variance over time) or nonstationary (ie, indicating time-varying behaviors or trends in the signal). Results: The study included 43 participants, 1080 data days, and 5400 contralateral temperature asymmetry signals. Most (4428/5400, 82%) of the temperature asymmetry signals were nonstationary, with intraday fluctuations likely influenced by physiological and environmental factors. Of the nonstationary signals, nearly half (1948/4428, 44%) fluctuated above and below the concerning asymmetry threshold of 2.2 °C. The intraday variability underscores the potential for false-positive and false-negative hot spot detection with once-daily measurements. Substantial variability was observed in stationarity patterns both within and across participants. Notably, concerning asymmetries in nonstationary signals occurred at different time points across participants, measurement windows, and days. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the value of continuous plantar temperature monitoring for diabetic foot health management, relative to once-daily measurements. Several repeated measurements throughout the day increase confidence with regard to the accuracy of observed plantar physiology trends. Continuous monitoring may improve the accuracy of plantar temperature measurement, unlock new diagnostic capabilities, and support personalized care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207