Correlation Between Functional Status and Quality of Life After Surgery in Patients With Primary Malignant Bone Tumor of the Lower Extremities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to explore the correlation between functional status and quality of life after surgery in patients with primary malignant bone tumor of the lower extremities. METHODS: A total of 94 patients with primary malignant bone tumor of the lower extremities were enrolled. Correlations between their functional status and quality of life after surgery were descriptively analyzed through functional mobility assessment, Toronto extremity salvage scaling, reintegration to normal life index, and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey. RESULTS: All patients presented decreased physical function, activities of daily life (ADL), and social participation capability. Their quality of life was significantly lower than the norm. Scores under all items of functional status significantly correlated with the quality-of-life score (r = .265-.427; p < .01). The postoperative functional status of patients with primary malignant bone tumor of the lower extremities greatly influences quality of life. Lower levels of physical function, ADL, and social participation indicate poorer quality of life. CONCLUSION: To improve quality of life, necessary nursing measures should be adopted to intervene with postoperative functional rehabilitation processes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".