MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390175877 · doi:10.3390/jcm13010107

A Scoping Review of Measurement Tools Evaluating Awareness and Disease-Related Knowledge in Peripheral Arterial Disease Patients

2023· review· en· W4390175877 on OpenAlexaff
C. Félix, Danielle Aparecida Gomes Pereira, Maureen Pakosh, Lílian Pinto da Silva, Gabriela Lima de Melo Ghisi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPeripheral Artery Disease Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCINAHLPsycINFOMEDLINEDiseaseSnowball samplingData extractionSystematic reviewCochrane LibraryAlternative medicineNursingPsychological interventionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is the third leading cause of atherosclerotic cardiovascular morbidity worldwide, with high prevalence and associated complications, and is often overlooked and undertreated. Research has shown that there is a profound lack of PAD-related knowledge and awareness; additionally, information sources are not often reliable and accessible. The objective of this scoping review was: (1) to identify and critically appraise instruments that measure patients' disease-related knowledge/awareness about PAD, and (2) to characterize the current state of knowledge/awareness levels among these patients. METHODS: This systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Six databases (APA PsycInfo, CINAHL Ultimate, Embase, Emcare Nursing, Medline ALL and Web of Science Core Collection) were searched, and search strategies were developed utilizing the PICO framework. Potential studies of any methodological design were considered for inclusion through a snowball hand search. Data from the included articles were extracted by a reviewer, and the extraction accuracy was independently cross-checked by another author. RESULTS: The initial database search yielded 9832 records, of which sixteen studies (thirteen quantitative and three qualitative) were included. Only three questionnaires had their psychometric properties assessed. Questionnaire items focused on the following topics: definition/characteristics, risk factors/causes, treatment, complications, and personal issues regarding the perception/management of the disease. Overall, knowledge/awareness about PAD was low among patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified major gaps in PAD education, including the lack of availability of a validated measurement tool addressing all educational topics relevant to care and low knowledge/awareness of patients about their condition.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.060
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.238
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0600.238
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0490.043
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.434
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.119 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine→Same topicPeripheral Artery Disease Management→French-language works237,207→