The Comparison of the Effects of Education Provided by Nurses on the Quality of Life in Patients with Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) in Usual and Home-Visit Cares in Iran
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Quality of life (QOL) can be considered as a quality indicator of health care systems and nurses can play an important role to improve QOL in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). The aim of this study was to determine the effects of education provided by nurses on the QOL in patients with CHF in home-visit care compared to usual care. METHOD: In a single-blind randomized controlled trial conducted from September 2011 to June 2012, 110 patients with CHF were randomly assigned into two groups. While patients in group I were received usual education at the time of hospital discharge, patients in Group II, in addition to usual education, were received special education regards to their illness by nurses who visited patients in their homes. The 36-item short-form (SF-36) questionnaire was used to evaluate the patient's QOL at the time of discharge and also six months after hospital discharge. RESULTS: At the time of hospital discharge, mean score of all 8 sub-score of SF-36 questionnaire was 63.4±7.8 in patients of group II and 61.1±6.4 in patients of group I, respectively (P> 0.05). QOL was decreased in group I and increased in group II compared to the time of hospital discharge. After six months, mean score of QOL was higher in group II than in group I. CONCLUSIONS: QOL of patients with CHF were decreased after hospital discharge. Education provided by nurses in home-visit care could improve the QOL in patients with CHF, based on the findings of this study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".