Factors supporting quality of life over time for individuals with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: the role of positive self-perception and religiosity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neuromuscular disease with no known cure. Maintaining quality of life (QOL) as the disease progresses is an important treatment goal. PURPOSE: the purpose of this study is to identify factors that support QOL as ALS progresses. METHODS: Changes in QOL were monitored in 162 individuals with ALS at 3- to 4-month intervals. Forty-nine of the participants survived in the study for over 1 year and were included in a longitudinal comparison. The 49 long-term participants were younger and stronger at Time 1 than were the participants who died before reaching the 1-year point. The McGill Quality of Life Scale demonstrated a high and stable QOL despite physical deterioration. RESULTS: Patients maintained a positive self-perception of their health despite the physical deterioration. Over time, self-perception of health and religiosity were shown to be significantly correlated with QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the need for better instrumentation to enable future studies to more precisely measure multiple dimensions of ALS-related QOL, to identify reference points for self-ratings of both health and QOL, and to capture the religious and spiritual mechanisms related to QOL as individuals face the end of life.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".