Lower limb venous and arterial peripheral diseases and work conditions: systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The individual peripheral vascular disease risk factors are well documented, but the role of work conditions remains equivocal. This systematic review aims to assess relationships between lower limb peripheral venous diseases (lower limb varicose veins (LLVV), venous thromboembolism (VTE) comprising deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), peripheral arterial disease (intermittent claudication, aortic dissection, aortic aneurysm) and occupational constraints among working adults. METHODS: Several databases were systematically searched until February 2019 for observational studies and clinical trials. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method was used for article selection. Quality assessment and risk of bias were evaluated using Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology and Newcastle-Ottawa scales. RESULTS: Among the 720 screened articles, 37 remained after full-text evaluation. Among the 21 studies on LLVV, prolonged standing was significantly associated to a higher risk of varicose veins with a threshold probably around >3 to 4 hours/day but exposure duration in years was not sufficiently considered. Seated immobility was often observed in workers, with no sufficient evidence to prove that prolonged sitting at work is related to VTE. Carrying heavy loads, stress at work and exposure to high temperatures have emerged more recently notably in relation to varicose veins but need to be better explored. Only three studies discussed the potential role of work on peripheral arterial disease development. CONCLUSIONS: Although some observational studies showed that prolonged standing can be related to varicose veins and that seated immobility at work could be linked to VTE, very little is known about peripheral arterial disease and occupational constraints. Clinical trials to determine preventive strategies at work are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019127652.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".