↓ Skip to main content

Monitoring of pH and temperature of neuropathic diabetic and nondiabetic foot ulcers for 12 weeks: An observational study

Overview of attention for article published in Wound Repair & Regeneration, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Monitoring of pH and temperature of neuropathic diabetic and nondiabetic foot ulcers for 12 weeks: An observational study
Published in
Wound Repair & Regeneration, May 2018
DOI 10.1111/wrr.12628
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georgina Gethin, Gerard M. O'Connor, Jaynal Abedin, John Newell, Louisa Flynn, David Watterson, Aorghus O'Loughlin

Abstract

Wound bed assessment is largely reliant on subjective interpretation without recourse to objective tools or biomarkers. The identification of a point of care, reliable biomarker would enhance assessment and ultimately clinical decision-making. Two potentially emerging wound biomarkers exist: surface pH and surface temperature. To date, knowledge of their use has been predominantly in wound prevention, in vitro studies and single time measurements. Our objective was to determine surface pH, size and surface temperature in non-infected, neuropathic foot ulcers at baseline and at 12 weeks. 50 patients (68% [n=34] had diabetes) participated. Mean baseline pH of wounds was 6.95 (SD 1.01); temperature 30.91°C (SD 3.00); and size 0.82cm2 (SD0.61). After 12 weeks, 26% (n=13) were lost to follow-up, 50% (n=25) had healed. Of the remaining patients, mean pH was 6.72 (SD0.54); temperature 30.88°C (SD2.97), and size 0.13cm2 (SD0.13). We have provided baseline values for pH and temperature of non-infected, neuropathic diabetic and non-diabetic foot ulceration. Further studies in a larger cohort are warranted to determine if temperature and or pH are indicative of a healing or non-healing state. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 27%
Unspecified 2 18%
Researcher 2 18%
Student > Master 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Other 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 3 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 27%
Unspecified 2 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Mathematics 1 9%
Other 1 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#8,063,930
of 12,859,333 outputs
Outputs from Wound Repair & Regeneration
#513
of 755 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,717
of 270,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Wound Repair & Regeneration
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,859,333 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 755 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 270,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.