Analysis of group program outcomes of youth with severe complex obesity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
From the results, we can conclude that there is a significant improvement in the perceived quality of life among parents and teens from the beginning of the program to the end, as well as from the start of phase I and the end.This is true of all scores except for the parent psychosocial summary score (α=0.074).Further research needs to be done to see whether these perceived gains are an accurate representation of quality of life among these youth, as well as whether these gains are sustained in the long-term. Analysis of group program outcomes of youth with severe complex obesitySevere complex obesity in youth has been linked to increased risk for a multitude of serious co-morbidities (including type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, sleep apnea and orthopedic complications), psychosocial problems and overall reduced quality of life [1,2].Developing effective treatment plans to help mitigate some of these serious health concerns for youth with clinical obesity is extremely important.CHAL works with clinically obese youth in the Ottawa area as a branch of the Children's Hospital for Eastern Ontario. The centre runs group programs with the aim of improving quality of life, eating behaviors and other obesity related issues for these youth and preventing health issues in their future. Two of the groups, labeled Phase I and Phase II (attended in sequence, with youth attending Phase I followed by Phase II) were examined. The working question was: Does attendance to group programs at CHAL impact quality of life of youth who have severe complex obesity? The hypothesis is that quality of life should increase with participation in group. Results MethodologyMeasures of health-related quality of life were analyzed using the PedsQL 4.0 (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory) questionnaire, which is used as a tool for measuring quality of life in children and adolescents ages 2-18. The PedsQL consists of four subscales; physical, social, emotional and school. The physical health summary score is calculated from the physical subscale (8 items), and the psychosocial summary score is calculated from the average of scores of the other three subscales (5 each, for a total of 15 items). The total health summary score is calculated as an average of the four subscale scores. The questionnaires were administered to the youth and their parents at the first and last group sessions, thus providing data for pre and post group. The data was entered into the statistical database SPSS, and analyzed using this database.The reliability and validity of the PedsQL 4.0 summary scores have been confirmed for applicability to clinical practice and research, and mean summary scores for healthy populations have been identified as follows;Parent: total=87.61,physical=89.32,psychosocial=86.58Youth: total=83.00,physical=84.41,
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».