Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice in the Management of Mixed Arteriovenous Leg Ulcers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leg ulceration is a chronic health condition that constitutes a significant disease burden. In this cross-sectional descriptive study, a sample of wound care clinicians were asked to respond to a web-based survey. Based on a review of literature and recommended best practices in the management of mixed arteriovenous (AV) ulcers, a questionnaire was developed to examine the knowledge, attitude, and practice pattern in the management of AV ulcers. A total of 436 clinicians participated in the survey. A number of assessment techniques were perceived to be relevant for the assessment of AV ulcers; medical history and the appearance of ulcers were the most commonly used methods in clinical practice. While over 80% of the participants conceded that compression should be used to promote wound healing, half of them would consider using compression for AV ulcers if ankle brachial index was less than 0.8. Half of the participants considered an ankle brachial index of 0.8 or higher as the optimal cutoff value for safe compression. The majority of respondents disagreed with the perception that caring for people with AV ulcers was unrewarding. However, challenges to promote treatment adherence, address psychosocial concerns, and optimize symptom management are common.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".