Influence of Psoriasis on Household Chores and Time Spent on Skin Care at Home: A Questionnaire Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have shown that psoriasis has a significant effect on patients' health-related quality of life. The impact of psoriasis on household chores and the need for assistance with such tasks are not well documented. The aim of this study was to estimate the impact of psoriasis on the ability to carry out household chores, the time spent on skin care at home and the assistance that patients with psoriasis require with these activities. METHODS: In a questionnaire study 262 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, visiting a tertiary level dermatological clinic during a 1-year study period, listed household chores which they considered were particularly affected by psoriasis. This was done without a predefined list of chores. Questions on their ability to perform household chores as well as time spent on skin care at home were asked. The need for outside assistance with household chores and help received were also determined. RESULTS: More than half of the patients (57.8%) reported difficulties with household chores because of psoriasis. Psoriasis affected a wide range of everyday household activities, with physically demanding tasks and those involving contact with water mentioned most often. Most of the patients (84.6%) reported that they have increased the time spent on skin care because of psoriasis, on average by 87 min per week. A quarter of patients received assistance in household chores. Women received more assistance than men (p < 0.01). The need for additional assistance was reported by a fifth of patients, women more often than men (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: When estimating the overall burden of psoriasis, considering only the economic and productivity consequences may underestimate the impact of the disease. The impact on everyday life events such as the ability to perform household chores should also be taken into account. FUNDING: This study was supported by unconditional grants from the research funds of the Hospital District of Southwest Finland. Hospital District of Southwest Finland's research permission K44/10/EVO13043.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".