Sex Differences in Osteomyelitis of the Foot in Persons With Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteomyelitis of the foot is a risk factor for amputation in persons with diabetes mellitus. There is some evidence to suggest that patient sex affects the risk of diabetes-related foot complications. PURPOSE: To examine the effect of sex on osteomyelitis risk in patients with diabetic foot disease. METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure were performed from inception through May 2020 using the terms "diabetic foot" and "osteomyelitis." Original research studies including persons with diabetes mellitus, diabetic foot disease, or ulcers as well as reports of osteomyelitis were included. Study quality was assessed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for osteomyelitis were calculated by sex. RESULTS: Nine (9) studies from 6 countries involving 2583 patients met the inclusion criteria for analysis. No significant publication bias was observed. The average age of patients was 65.2 years, and 32.03% of men and 30.0% of women were diagnosed with osteomyelitis. The pooled OR was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.94-1.38; P = .76). Regression analysis (t = -0.61; P > .561) showed no association between the incidence of osteomyelitis and ORs. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis suggests that patient sex does not affect the odds of having osteomyelitis among persons with diabetes and diabetic foot disease or ulcers.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".