A comparison of two diabetic foot ulcer classification systems: the Wagner and the University of Texas wound classification systems.

By Samson O Oyibo, E. Jude, I. Tarawneh, H. Nguyen, L. Harkless, A. Boulton. Diabetes Care, 2001

607 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

High prevalence of ischaemia, infection and serious comorbidity in patients with diabetic foot disease in Europe. Baseline results from the Eurodiale study (2006, background): “In this study, 58% of all ulcers were infected at presentation according to predefined criteria; infection rates of 35–50% were reported in the majority of earlier studies [8, 18, 19].”
Challenges in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds (2015, methodology): “Classification can ultimately guide treatment by prompting systematic evaluation of important underlying components and, furthermore, can predict outcomes based on the severity of the disease.(57) Imaging is a valuable method for assessment of the wound healing process.”
Diagnosis and treatment of diabetic foot infections. (2004, methodology): “The Wagner system [15, 40, 98, 99] has been widely used for 25”