A case-control study of risk factors of chronic venous ulceration in patients with varicose veins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/objectives Venous ulcers carry psychological and high financial burden for patients, causing depression, pain, and limitation of mobility. The study aimed to identify factors associated with an increased risk of venous ulceration in patients with varicose veins in Armenia. Methods A case-control study design was utilized enrolling 80 patients in each group, who underwent varicose treatment surgery in two specialized surgical centers in Armenia during 2013-2014 years. Cases were patients with varicose veins and venous leg ulcers. Controls included patients with varicose veins but without venous leg ulcers. Data were collected using interviewer-administered telephone interviews and medical record abstraction. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to identify the risk factors of venous ulceration. Results There were more females than males in both groups (72.5% of cases and 85.0 % of controls). Cases were on average older than controls (53.9 vs. 39.2 years old, p ≤ 0.001). After adjusting for potential confounders, the estimated odds of developing venous ulcer was higher in patients with history of post thrombotic syndrome (odds ratio = 14.90; 95% confidence interval: 3.95-56.19; p = 0.001), with higher average sitting time (odds ratio = 1.32 per hour of sitting time; 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.61; p = 0.006), those with reflux in deep veins (odds ratio = 3.58; 95% confidence interval: 1.23-10.31; p = 0.019) and history of leg injury (odds ratio = 3.12; 95% confidence interval: 1.18-8.23; p = 0.022). Regular exercise in form of walking (≥5 days per week) was found to be a protective factor from venous ulceration (odds ratio = 0.26; 95% confidence interval: 0.08-0.90; p = 0.034). Conclusion We found that reflux in deep veins, history of leg injury, history of post thrombotic syndrome, and physical inactivity were significant risk factors for venous ulceration in patients with varicose veins, while regular physical exercise mitigated that risk. Future studies should investigate the relationships between the duration and type of regular exercise and the risk of venous ulceration to make more specific recommendations on preventing ulcer development.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".