Quality-of-Life Assessment in an Outpatient Parenteral Antibiotic Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure changes and to identify predictors of change of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for enrollees into an outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) program. METHODS: A multidisciplinary, single-center, prospective investigation was conducted at a 1000-bed Canadian adult tertiary-care teaching hospital. Over a 15-month study period, consenting patients who were enrolled in the OPAT program completed paired Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaires within 48 hours prior to discharge from the hospital and again 26-30 days after discharge. Sociodemographic data and clinical variables were also collected for the purpose of determining potential predictors of change in quality of life. RESULTS: During the study period, 134 patients were enrolled in the OPAT program and 82 completed the paired SF-36 questionnaires. Study participants experienced a significant improvement in 3 SF-36 domains (physical functioning, bodily pain, role emotional) and the mental component summary scale (MCS) scores when they were transferred from the hospital to home setting. The SF-36 scores for all domains and summary scales were lower than the Canadian population average (all p < 0.001). Multiple linear-regression analysis revealed that infectious disease diagnosis and baseline physical component summary scale (PCS) scores were predictors of the change in the PCS score when patients transferred from the hospital to the home setting. Length of hospital stay and baseline MCS scores were predictors of the change in MCS scores when patients transferred from the hospital to the home setting. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals that some domains in HRQoL appear to improve 4 weeks after discharge for adults enrolled in an OPAT program and that there are different predictors for changes in physical and mental health.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".