MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026229264 · doi:10.1177/1534734614554284

Lipedema

2014· review· en· W2026229264 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Phillip Okhovat, Afsáneh Alavi

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic System and Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphedemaLiposuctionEpidemiologyIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsPathologySurgeryCancerInternal medicineBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lipedema is a disorder of adipose tissue that primarily affects females and is often misdiagnosed as obesity or lymphedema. Relatively few studies have defined the precise pathogenesis, epidemiology, and management strategies for this disorder, yet the need to successfully identify this disorder as a unique entity has important implications for proper treatment. In this review, we sought to review and identify information in the existing literature with respect to the epidemiology, pathogenesis, clinical presentation, differential diagnosis, and management strategies for lipedema. The current literature suggests that lipedema appears to be a clinical entity thought to be related to both genetic factors and fat distribution. While distinct from lymphedema and obesity, there are some existing treatments such as complex decongestive physiotherapy, liposuction, and laser-assisted lipolysis. Management of lipedema is complex and distinct from lymphedema. The role of newer randomized controlled studies to further explore the management of this clinical entity remains promising.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.005

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations80
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Lower Extremity WoundsSame topicLymphatic System and DiseasesFrench-language works237,207