Impact of fatigue on the quality of life of patients with primary biliary cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Fatigue is a frustrating symptom frequently reported by patients with primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC), but it is still poorly understood and not well evaluated. Our aim was to determine its importance and its impact on the quality of life and mental health status of patients with PBC. METHODS: Patients with PBC (103 women and 13 men with a mean age of 52.6 yr) completed self-report questionnaires to evaluate the impact of fatigue on their quality of life (Fatigue Impact Scale, FIS), the perception of their own mental health (Symptom Check list-90-R, SCL), and depression (Beck Depression Inventory, BDI). A cohort of age-matched healthy blood donors served as controls. RESULTS: Fatigue was present in 99 patients (85.3%) and was the worst or one of the worst symptoms in about half of them. In PBC patients, the mean FIS and SCL indexes were significantly increased, compared to healthy controls (1.49 +/- 1.11 vs 0.6 +/- 0.6 and 0.72 +/- 0.55 vs 0.36 +/- 0.35, respectively). Unexpectedly, 52 patients (44.8%) could be classified as having depression (BDI score > 10). Significant correlations were found between the FIS and SCL indexes, between the FIS index and the BDI score, as well as between the BDI score and the SCL index. Finally, fatigue was not related to the disease severity parameters, that is, clinical, biochemical, metabolic, and pathological. CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue is a frequent and disabling complaint that impairs the quality of life of PBC patients and their perception of their own mental health, which may be associated with an unexpected depressive condition. In addition, the FIS questionnaire can be considered as a useful tool to assess fatigue in PBC patients and may be used in the evaluation of specific treatments aimed at reducing this complaint in such patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".