The impact of diabetic retinopathy on health-related quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review recent evidence evaluating the effect of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema on health-related quality of life. RECENT FINDINGS: A search of PubMed was conducted according to a strategy that combined the text words 'diabetic retinopathy' and 'quality of life' (n = 91; November 11, 2004) and 'diabetic macular edema' and 'quality of life' (n = 6; November 22, 2004). The Methods sections of all abstracts were reviewed for valid generic or disease-specific instruments used to evaluate health-related quality of life. In addition, abstracts were reviewed to ensure that the study sample was made up predominantly of diabetic individuals. Recent data suggest that persons with diabetic retinopathy are willing to trade off significant time to eliminate their ocular condition (mean time tradeoff score = 0.77-0.8) and that laser photocoagulation can improve health-related quality of life (significant improvement noted in 8 of 11 domains in the National Eye Institute Visual Function Questionnaire). In addition, recent research has noted that health-related quality of life can become affected in persons with diabetic retinopathy prior to visual loss, primarily because of anxiety about the future and emotional reaction to diagnosis and treatment. SUMMARY: From a search of the literature, several recent articles could be identified that demonstrated both a qualitative and a quantitative reduction in health-related quality of life in persons with diabetic retinopathy. With many novel treatments being explored for the management of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema, measuring health-related quality of life will likely play an important role both in the decision to offer treatment and in monitoring relevant health gains that may be derived from intervention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".