MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083129021 · doi:10.1097/jcn.0b013e31820612b8

Self-care and Quality of Life of Heart Failure Patients at a Multidisciplinary Heart Function Clinic

2011· article· en· W2083129021 on OpenAlex
Emily Seto, Kevin J. Leonard, Joseph A Cafazzo, Caterina Masino, Jan Barnsley, Heather J. Ross

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachQuality of life (healthcare)Heart failureSelf careEjection fractionAnxietyHealth careConfidence intervalPhysical therapyGerontologyFamily medicineNursingInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary heart function clinics aim to improve self-care through patient education and to provide clinical management. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of the present study were to investigate the self-care and quality of life of patients attending a multidisciplinary heart function clinic and to explore the relationship between self-care and quality of life. METHODS: One hundred outpatients attending a multidisciplinary heart function clinic were asked to complete a questionnaire. The questionnaire included the Self-care of Heart Failure Index (SCHFI) and the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire, which were used to assess self-care behavior and quality of life, respectively. Self-care practices and perceived barriers were also assessed through semistructured interviews with each patient. RESULTS: : The returned questionnaires (n = 94) were used to compute the following SCHFI maintenance, management, and confidence scores: 60.8 (SD, 19.3), 62.0 (SD, 20.7), and 55.9 (SD, 19.7), respectively. Higher SCHFI scores indicate better self-care. None of the self-care dimensions reached the self-care adequacy cut point of 70. The average score on the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire was 49.9 (SD, 25.4), indicating a moderate health-related quality of life. Lower ejection fraction, older age, and better quality of life were associated with better self-care. Determinants of better quality of life were older age, better functional capacity, higher self-care confidence, and fewer comorbidities. The patient interviews revealed that better quality of life is associated with higher self-care confidence and barriers to self-care caused anxiety to the patients. The self-care barriers were found to include lack of self-care education, financial constraints, lack of perceived benefit, and low self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients attending a large multidisciplinary Canadian heart failure clinic do not perform adequate self-care as measured with the SCHFI and report only a moderate quality of life. Increasing self-care through education and tools that target self-care barriers are required and may help improve quality 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it