The Influence of Pain: Quality of Life after <i>Pectus excavatum</i> Correction
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
Introduction: The main indication for surgery of thoracic wall deformities (TWD) is psychological due to cosmetic complaints. The assumption is that appearances have a negative effect on self-esteem and quality of life (QoL). Correction should result in improvement. Methods: Prospective trial. QoL was assessed using the CHQ and the WHOQOL-bref. Measurements were taken before surgery (T1) and 6 weeks thereafter (T2). Results: Forty-two patients were included. WHOQOL-bref showed differences between pre-operative and six weeks past surgery on facet body image (p = 0.003). Self-esteem (CHQ) did not show a significant improvement at T2. Concerning the scores on the single step questionnaire (SSQ), 33 patients were “very” to “extremely satisfied” with appearance and increased self-esteem (p < 0.001). Concerning the domain “pain and physical complaints”, CHQ did show a significant change (p < 0.001) with more complaints at T2. Conclusion: Six weeks after surgical correction of a TWD satisfaction with the “new” chest is good; pain seems to be a problem with possible negative influence on self-esteem.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it