A Cross-Sectional Study in Kerman, Iran, on the Effect of Diabetic Foot Ulcer on Health-Related Quality of Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study describes the impact of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) using a generic instrument including 8 domains. Data were obtained from 54 patients with DFU who were compared with 78 patients who had diabetes without foot ulcer. HRQoL was measured using the Iranian version of Medical Outcome Study-Short Form (SF-36). The fasting plasma glucose, creatinine, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and urine microalbumin as well as ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI) were measured for all participants in the 2 groups. In all, 51.9% of patients with DFU had ABI scores of <0.9 compared with only 11.8% of the control group (P < .001). No differences were found in any of the treatment characteristics (oral/insulin therapy) between the 2 groups (case/control). HRQoL evaluated by the SF-36 questionnaire, in particular in the areas of physical function, is lower in patients with diabetes with foot ulcers compared with patients with diabetes without foot ulcers (41.04 ± 22.69 vs 56.67 ± 25.57; P < .01). After adjusting by sex, 2 domains of physical functioning and bodily pain as well as the total HRQoL score in patients with DFU were lower than in patients with diabetes (P < .001). This study showed that physical functioning and bodily pain along with total score of HRQoL were important aspects that were lower in patients with DFU than in patients with diabetes. Gender was considered as a confounding factor, which was omitted in multivariate analysis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".