Antiphospholipid antibodies and lower extremity peripheral arterial disease - a systematic review and meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite being an important risk factor for venous thromboembolism and ischaemic stroke, the role of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with peripheral arterial disease remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of persistently elevated antiphospholipid antibodies and lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases including MEDLINE, EUROPUBMED and EMBASE to assess the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Case-control studies were included if they reported the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease. Two reviewers (FV and EG) independently assessed the eligibility of all articles. The primary outcome measure was the odds ratio (OR) for the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease, along with the corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Our initial electronic search identified 128 relevant abstracts, of which two studies were included. Antiphospholipid antibodies were found in 50/571 patients with lower extremity peripheral arterial disease and 13/490 of the controls, OR 3.32 (95 % CI = 1.49 to 7.4). In those with critical limb ischaemia, the prevalence of antiphospholipid antibodies was elevated compared to controls, pooled OR 4.78 (95 % CI = 2.37 to 9.65). CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that the prevalence of persistently elevated levels of antiphospholipid antibodies is increased in patients with lower extremity peripheral diseases when compared to healthy controls, especially in those with critical limb ischaemia.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 it