Impact of liver transplantation on health-related quality of life
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is designed to measure the impact of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) on patients' health-related quality of life. Two types of health-related quality-of-life questionnaires were administered at baseline and after OLT: generic (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36) and liver specific (Chronic Liver Disease Questionnaire). We also recorded clinical, demographic, and laboratory data. Pre-OLT scores of liver transplant candidates were compared with those of the general population and patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Thirty-seven liver transplant candidates were evaluated: 25 men and 12 women; age, 50.2 +/- 12 years; Child's class A, 3 patients; class B, 30 patients; class C, 4 patients; and galactose elimination capacity, 277 +/- 81. Health-related quality-of-life scores for patients awaiting liver transplants were significantly lower than those for patients with COPD and CHF and those in the general population. Sex and cause of liver disease did not affect the scores. There was a weak but significant inverse correlation between some aspects of health-related quality of life and both age (r = -0.31 to -0.34) and worsening of the Child-Pugh score (r = -0.32 to -0.43). All measured aspects of health-related quality of life significantly improved after OLT, and mental health scores were indistinguishable from the population norms. Similar improvements were evident in physical and disease-specific aspects of health-related quality of life, but some residual dysfunction persisted.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it