Bibliographic record
Abstract
The management of chronic illness is becoming increasingly patient-centred. Although patients with inflammatory bowel disease have a normal life expectancy, most individuals experience an impact of inflammatory bowel disease on their daily lives as well as on their attitudes, fears and beliefs. Although currently available therapies for ulcerative colitis and Crohn's disease are becoming increasingly effective, there are still many unmet needs to address in this patient population. Physicians and patients' spouses or significant others underestimate the type and severity of problems reported by inflammatory bowel disease patients. Physical problems are frequently measured using disease activity indices. Emotional and social problems are reported using quality of life questionnaires and other specific measurement tools pertinent to the question of interest. Studies have indicated a poorer physical and emotional function in inflammatory bowel disease patients than in the general population. Effective therapies, both medical and surgical, produce significant improvements in the general and disease-specific quality of life. The quality of life is worse when the disease is more severe. Concomitant anxiety or depression appears to impair the quality of life even further. Common fears include the possibility of unanticipated flares, the need for surgery, poor energy levels and the side-effects of medication. Recent studies have suggested that more prominent patient participation in management has the potential for greater patient satisfaction, better outcomes and more efficient health resource utilization. Thus, future studies should focus not only on ensuring the wider availability of effective therapies, but on increasing access to health care that is tailored to individuals--more structure for some and more independence and self-management for others, with health provider supervision.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".