Chronic pain and quality of life following open inguinal hernia repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim was to determine the frequency and characteristics of chronic pain following open inguinal hernia repair and to identify risk factors for its development. METHODS: This was a questionnaire survey of a historical cohort of patients who underwent inguinal hernia surgery in Aberdeen. The sample comprised all patients (n = 351) who underwent surgery between January 1995 and December 1997, and who were alive and resident in Grampian in October 1999. Outcome measures included self-report of pain persisting for more than 3 months after operation. Pain was characterized by means of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, and quality of life was assessed with the Short Form 36 (SF-36). RESULTS: A total of 226 patients (64 per cent) completed the questionnaire, 67 (30 per cent) of whom reported chronic pain. Reported pain was predominantly neuropathic in character. Patients at increased risk of chronic pain were under 40 years old (P < 0.001), had day-case surgery (P = 0.004), had subsequent surgery on the same side (P < 0.005) and recalled pain before operation (P = 0.005). The SF-36 scores were significantly different in the social functioning, mental health and pain dimensions in patients with chronic pain. CONCLUSION: Chronic pain occurred in 30 per cent of patients after open hernia repair, a higher frequency than has been reported previously. Several risk factors were identified and further prospective research is recommended.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".