Health-Related Quality of Life in Diabetic Patients With Foot Ulcers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foot ulcers are a common, serious, and costly complication of diabetes, preceding 84% of lower extremity amputations in diabetic patients and increasing the risk of death by 2.4-fold over diabetic patients without ulcers. Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is worse among individuals with diabetes than individuals without diabetes, and complications of diabetes, including foot ulcers, have a major negative effect on HRQOL. Diabetic foot ulcers are associated with reduced mobility and deficits related to activities of daily living that adversely affect HRQOL. Qualitative studies have confirmed clinical observations that diabetic foot ulcers have a huge negative psychological and social effect, including reduction in social activities, increased family tensions for patients and their caregivers (spouses or partners), limited employment, and financial hardship. Quantitative studies confirm the findings of qualitative studies that diabetic foot ulcers exert a negative effect on physical functioning, psychological status, and social situation. Recent advances include the development and validation of disease-specific HRQOL surveys for diabetic patients with foot ulcers. Disease-specific surveys may improve the evaluation of HRQOL as a function of ulcer healing, the effect of different treatment methods on HRQOL, and the relationship between treatment-specific HRQOL, patient compliance, and treatment efficacy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".