Differences in Symptom Presentation in Women and Men with Confirmed Lower Limb Peripheral Artery 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
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differences in symptoms between men and women that present with lower limb peripheral artery disease (PAD). DATA SOURCES: Systematic review and meta-analysis using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. REVIEW METHODS: A systematic search of the literature to identify studies that examined PAD and its symptoms using PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, which were screened in duplicate by two reviewers. Information on study design, source of data, population characteristics, and outcomes of interest was extracted and used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool. Quality of evidence was rated using the GRADE methodology. Estimates of relative effects were pooled to generate pooled odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random effects model. RESULTS: Thirteen cross sectional studies, six cohorts, one case control, and one randomised clinical trial, reporting on 1 929 966 patients with confirmed PAD (established by clinical history, clinical examination, and/or ankle brachial index, or further tests) were included. Women presented less often with intermittent claudication than men (25.9% vs. 30.2%) OR 0.78 (95% CI 0.72 - 0.84, very low quality of evidence), while rest pain and atypical leg symptoms were more prevalent in women (12.8% vs. 9.2%) OR 1.40 (95% CI 1.22 - 1.60, very low quality of evidence) and (22.8% vs. 19.8%) OR 1.18 (95% CI 0.96 - 1.45, very low quality of evidence), respectively. CONCLUSION: Women with PAD more often present with rest pain, while their prevalence of intermittent claudication is lower. They also tend to present more often with atypical leg symptoms. This study underlines that PAD symptom presentation differs between the sexes. Therefore, clinicians and researchers should not consider men and women as a single population and report their data separately.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it