The influence of diabetes on temporal trends in lower extremity revascularisation and amputation for peripheral artery disease: A population‐based repeated cross‐sectional analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM/HYPOTHESIS: To describe the influence of diabetes on temporal changes in rates of lower extremity revascularisation and amputation for peripheral artery disease (PAD) in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: In this population-based repeated cross-sectional study, we calculated annual rates of lower extremity revascularisation (open or endovascular) and amputation (toe, foot or leg) related to PAD among Ontario residents aged ≥40 years between 2002 and 2019. Annual rate ratios (relative to 2002) adjusted for changes in diabetes prevalence alone, as well as fully adjusted for changes in demographics, diabetes and other comorbidities, were estimated using generalized estimating equation models to model population-level effects while accounting for correlation within units of observation. RESULTS: Compared with 2002, the Ontario population in 2019 exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of diabetes (18% vs. 10%). Between 2002 and 2019, the crude rate of revascularisation increased from 75.1 to 90.7/100,000 person-years (unadjusted RR = 1.10, 95% CI = 1.07-1.13). However, after adjustment, there was no longer an increase in the rate of revascularisation (diabetes-adjusted RR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.96-1.01, fully-adjusted RR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.91-0.96). The crude rate of amputation decreased from 2002 to 2019 from 49.5 to 45.4/100,000 person-years (unadjusted RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.75-0.81), but was more pronounced after adjustment (diabetes-adjusted RR = 0.62, 95% CI = 0.60-0.64; fully-adjusted RR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.56-0.60). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Diabetes prevalence rates strongly influenced rates of revascularisation and amputation related to PAD. A decrease in amputations related to PAD over time was attenuated by rising diabetes prevalence rates.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".