Health-related quality of life among lipedema patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectivesLipedema is a chronic condition that predominantly affects women, leading to painful, disproportionate fat distribution in the limbs. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize health-related quality of life (HRQoL) across multiple domains in individuals with lipedema.MethodsWe systematically reviewed studies from inception to 3 July 2025 in MEDLINE (via PubMed) and Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL) that primarily assessed HRQoL in individuals with lipedema. Data were extracted from studies using HRQoL assessment scales. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studies. The review protocol was pre-registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024590792). A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted to compute pooled mean HRQoL scores across various domains.ResultsFourteen cross-sectional studies involving nine countries and 3851 participants were included. The meta-analysis found significant impairments in multiple HRQoL domains: physical functioning (61.19, 95% CI: 56.77-65.60), pain (51.77, 95% CI: 45.01-58.53), social functioning (63.24, 95% CI: 58.44-68.04), emotional well-being (64.19, 95% CI: 59.86-68.52), and energy/fatigue (43.50, 95% CI: 39.32-47.68).ConclusionLipedema significantly affects HRQoL, with major deficits in physical, emotional, and social functioning. These findings highlight the need for greater clinical awareness and comprehensive management strategies, including both physical and psychological interventions, to improve the quality of life for individuals with lipedema. Further research is needed to explore long-term effects and optimize treatment approaches.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".