Quality of Life following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: The Role of Alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alexithymia refers to a set of cognitive and emotional deficits. Its effect on surgical outcome has been demonstrated but no studies have been published on colorectal cancer patients. STUDY DESIGN: A series of 60 consecutive colorectal cancer patients were enrolled in a 3-year prospective study on quality of life by using the SF-36 test and Toronto Alexithymia Scale questionnaires. Patients were investigated pre- and postoperatively (before discharge and then 1 and 3 months thereafter). The control group consisted of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy for cholelithiasis. These two groups were divided into two subsets: high-level alexithymia (HA) and low-level alexithymia (LA). The prevalence of HA was 34% in colorectal patients and 35% in cholelithiasis patients. RESULTS: During the postoperative period, in the colorectal group the SF-36 score was significantly higher in HA than in LA subsets. This result was confirmed in the cholelithiasis group. During follow-up, a progressive reduction of the SF-36 score was observed in both HA populations. DISCUSSION: Results emerging from this investigation demonstrate that surgery significantly improves the quality of life in HA patients. These findings suggest that alexithymia might be advantageous in evaluating the adaptation after surgery in the short follow-up period.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".