Quality of life analysis in patients with anterior skull base neoplasms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Significant morbidity is associated with management of anterior skull base neoplasms. The aim of this study was to evaluate the posttreatment patient's quality of life (QOL). METHODS: A retrospective chart review identified 27 patients. QOL tools included the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head & Neck, Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D), Atkinson Life Happiness Rating (ALHR), and Midface Dysfunction Scale (MDS). RESULTS: Postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy was required in 16 and 2 patients, respectively. The median FACT, ALHR, and CES-D scores were 118 +/- 21, 9 +/- 2, and 17 +/- 8, respectively. Smell and nasal crusting disturbance was reported by 69% and 61%, respectively. CES-D > 16 and patients with recurrent disease correlated with a lower Total-FACT score. Adjuvant radiotherapy correlated with a lower FACT-H&N score. Patient sex, marital-status, pathology, surgical technique, or complication rate did not correlate with worse QOL. CONCLUSION: Anterior skull base neoplasms survivors have an overall acceptable QOL. Most complaints relate to MDS. Recurrence, adjuvant radiotherapy, and MDS had lower QOL scores.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".