Surgery and Caregiving: Loneliness of the Patients and Those Who Care for Them
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research, conducted on patients and caregivers, examined the qualitative aspects of their loneliness. Patients were divided into those who were approached before they had surgery, and those post operatively. We collected information about their tumors, which were either benign or malignant. The patients’ loneliness was compared to their caregivers who were either intimate partners or “others”, i.e. family members and friends. The loneliness questionnaire, has already been extensively utilized in previous studies, and was used to explore the various aspects of loneliness of those groups. Significant differences in subscale scores were found in patients pre and post surgery, with those who have already had surgery scoring higher. Additionally, those who were cared for by a partner scored lower on the loneliness subscales than those attended to by “other”. Interestingly, the only significant difference in the caregiver group was between men and women, in line with the socialization process of the genders, which makes women more open and vocal about their feelings and needs.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".