MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3165187115 · doi:10.1007/s40123-021-00352-3

Seeing Beyond Anatomy: Quality of Life with Geographic Atrophy

2021· article· en· W3165187115 sur OpenAlexaff
Dolores Caswell, William Caswell, Jill Carlton

Notice bibliographique

RevueOphthalmology and Therapy · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueRetinal Diseases and Treatments
Établissements canadiensCARE CanadaCanadian Patient Safety InstituteCNIB Foundation
Organismes subventionnairesBoehringer Ingelheim
Mots-clésQuality of life (healthcare)MedicineGeographic atrophyQualitative researchQuality (philosophy)DiseaseBlindnessGerontologyPsychologyInternet privacyMacular degenerationNursingOptometryPathologyPsychiatrySociologyComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Quality of life (QoL) is a complex idea without a clear consensus definition. Generally speaking, QoL refers to several subjective measures of wellbeing that vary by individual and circumstance. QoL can decline noticeably as a disease progresses. This is particularly true for geographic atrophy (GA), an advanced form of age-related macular degeneration. GA leads to vision loss for which there is no currently approved pharmacological treatment. There is a lack of qualitative, patient-driven research on QoL in GA. There is also limited information available to both patients and physicians about GA, existing support groups and available assistive technologies. To address this, we have collated the experiences of a person with GA and those of her partner and carer with the current literature on QoL in GA. We have also outlined some of the wide range of developing technologies available to help people with GA carry out daily tasks and hobbies. It is clear that support, whether through informal or structured care, is vital to the wellbeing of people with GA. Despite this, the general public are often unaware of care work, which may result in this integral role being undervalued and under acknowledged. Furthermore, it is apparent that the general public have fundamental misunderstandings around what vision loss entails and are unaware that blindness is a vast spectrum. This feeds into the seemingly paradoxical mix of isolation and dependence on others that often results from GA and vision loss. Through this qualitative examination of a patient’s experiences, we hope to inform and educate both patients and physicians about GA as well as precipitate discussion around the frameworks that should be in place to support both newly diagnosed and long-term patients with GA and other retinal diseases. Asking someone about their ‘quality of life’ is one way to understand their general wellbeing. Quality of life can mean different things to different people. For some people it may mean being able to do what they want to. For others it may include feelings such as happiness. Diseases that cause people to lose their vision can have a very big impact on quality of life. Geographic atrophy is an eye disease that leads to loss of vision and has no cure. In this article, Dolores, a person with geographic atrophy, Bill, her husband and carer, and Jill, a quality of life researcher, discuss how geographic atrophy can change quality of life. Vision loss often means that people are unable to keep up their hobbies and do daily tasks, like shopping or cooking. Learning to use smartphone apps and gadgets can help many people with their hobbies and tasks. Feeling alone also makes quality of life for people with geographic atrophy worse. The help and understanding of others—including friends, family and doctors—are very important. Treatment plans for patients with vision loss need to consider all parts of a patient’s life. Training for doctors should continue to emphasise that people with geographic atrophy are more than just eyes that cannot be treated.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,026
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,272

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,331
Écart entre enseignants0,305 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations18
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOphthalmology and TherapyMême sujetRetinal Diseases and TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207