Quality of Life and Symptomatology Before and After Nissen Fundoplication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post surgical quality of life (QOL) plays an important role in the decision making process for patients. This study evaluated the subjective opinion of those that underwent Nissen fundoplication to correct their symptoms of hiatus hernia. This study was to evaluate the quality of life and symptomatology before and after in those patients that underwent Nissen fundoplication over an 8-year period. METHODS: A questionnaire that graded the severity of symptoms and quality of life pre- and post-operatively was sent out to those patients that had undergone Nissen fundoplication. RESULTS: After the operation the symptoms of heartburn, regurgitation, burping and difficulty lying down were markedly decreased (P < 0.0001). There was however an increased incidence of flatulence associated with the procedure (P < 0.0001). Despite this the quality of life was significantly increased in those that underwent Nissen fundoplication (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Nissen Fundoplication has a positive impact on quality of life and is effective in reducing symptoms of heartburn, regurgitation, burping and difficulty lying down associated with a hiatus hernia. There is however an increase in the incidence of flatulence associated with the procedure. In spite of this, 94% of patients would recommend the procedure to someone else.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".