MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W176765983

A descriptive survey study on the effect of age on quality of life following stoma surgery.

2013· article· en· W176765983 on OpenAlexaffabout
Selina K. Wong, Pang Y. Young, Sandy Widder, Rachel G. Khadaroo

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStoma care and complications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStoma (medicine)Quality of life (healthcare)PopulationActivities of daily livingSurgeryPhysical therapyNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of operative procedures involving the creation of an intestinal stoma is likely to increase as the population ages. Understanding the role of age on postoperative outcomes such as quality of life (QoL) and self-efficacy is critical to developing appropriate supportive strategies. A descriptive survey study was conducted among 18 patients (11 men seven women, age range 47 to 90 years) who had an intestinal ostomy created during a 3-year period at the University of Alberta Hospital in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. The Stoma Quality of Life Survey and a self-efficacy survey examining self-care, activities of daily living, and instrumental activities of daily living were administered. Patient records were obtained through a retrospective chart review; of the 57 patients identified, 18 were still alive, had not undergone stoma reversal, were cognitively competent, and agreed to participate. Seven patients were <65 years old and 11 were ≥65 years old. Of those, four patients had their stoma since 2009, four patients since 2010, and 10 patients since 2011. Although older patients had more comorbidities and higher mortality following the surgery (46.1% for patients >65 versus 26.1%, for patients <65 years old), no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups for stoma-associated QoL and self-efficacy scores. In patients who had stoma surgery in 2011, older patients on average had higher QoL scores (65.21 versus 61.87, maximum score 100, P = 0.56), but lower self-efficacy scores (32.50 versus 35.25, maximum score 40, P = 0.50). These findings are similar to previously reported study results. However, the small study sample size limits analysis of the variables that may affect QoL in stoma patients. This study supports the need for additional prospective studies to help clinicians develop effective support strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicStoma care and complicationsFrench-language works237,207