A Survey of the Pain Experienced by Males and Females with Fabry Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The clinical onset of Fabry disease, a rare, X-linked, multisystemic disorder, is marked by neuropathic pain. Males suffer extensively from this disease. Females, as genetic 'carriers', have traditionally been viewed as either asymptomatic or mildly afflicted with this disease. OBJECTIVES: To describe Fabry-related pain and compare experiences between the sexes. Patients' perceptions of physician pain assessments were also examined. METHODS: A disease-specific questionnaire was accessible on-line (www.fabry.org) and mailed to 552 members of a Fabry disease support group. RESULTS: The response rate was 14.3% for the support group-based mail questionnaire. Females (58.0%) were significantly older (mean +/- SD 45.9+/-13.5 years) than males (mean +/- SD 40.0+/-12.1; t [86]=-2.11, P<0.05). Females were diagnosed with Fabry disease later (31.1+/-14.0 years) than males (24.2+/-11.9 years; t [86]=-2.43, P<0.05). Females (mean score for pain disability rating 3.0+/-1.4) suffered more extensive disability from migraine pain (mean score 2.2+/-1.3; F [1, 74]=45.0, P<0.005), and, unlike males, did not exhibit a decline in pain intensity with disease duration. Satisfaction with physician pain assessments was moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the traditional view of females as carriers, females with Fabry disease experienced intense disease-related pain; pain produced comparable distress and impairment in both sexes. The diagnostic delay and absence of a decline in pain symptoms over time in females suggest additional disease burden. Females may be triply disadvantaged in the health care system due to disease rarity, devalued carrier status and sex.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".