MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160954200 · doi:10.1002/alr.21505

Biofilm‐forming bacteria and quality of life improvement after sinus surgery

2015· article· en· W2160954200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zi Zhang, Nithin D. Adappa, Alexander G. Chiu, Laurel Doghramji, Noam A. Cohen, James N. Palmer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Forum of Allergy & Rhinology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSinusitis and nasal conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFunctional endoscopic sinus surgeryBiofilmMedicineChronic rhinosinusitisConfidence intervalInternal medicineBacteriaQuality of life (healthcare)Endoscopic sinus surgerySinusitisGastroenterologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear how much chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) patients with bacterial biofilms can benefit from functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). We aimed to evaluate whether biofilm-forming bacteria was associated with quality of life (QOL) improvement after FESS. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included adult CRS patients who underwent FESS from 2008 to 2011. Sinus samples were taken to evaluate for biofilm-formation in vitro using a modified Calgary Biofilm Detection Assay. QOL was measured before FESS, and 1-month, 3-month, and 6-month after FESS using 22-item Sino-Nasal Outcome Test (SNOT-22) scores. Patients' characteristics and medications were collected. Clinical significant QOL change was defined as a difference of at least 0.5 standard deviation (SD) of baseline SNOT-22 score in the reference group. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients had complete data, and 15% had biofilm-forming bacteria (n = 24). Patients with biofilm-forming bacteria had significantly worse preoperative SNOT-22 scores compared to patients without biofilm-forming bacteria (48 ± 20 vs 38 ± 23, p = 0.048). Both groups had clinically significant QOL improvement after FESS, and the differences in their 1-month (23 ± 19 vs 17 ± 20) and 3-month (27 ± 18 vs 18 ± 19) post-FESS SNOT-22 scores were not significant. However, patients with biofilm-forming bacteria demonstrated significantly less QOL improvement than patients without biofilm-forming bacteria from pre-FESS to 6-month post-FESS visits after adjusting for clinical factors (35 ± 25 vs 14 ± 15; β-coefficient = 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 1.28; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: CRS patients with biofilm-forming bacteria demonstrated clinically significant QOL improvement following FESS, but the degree of improvement was decreased overtime and became significantly worse than patients without biofilm-forming bacteria by 6-month follow-up. This QOL worsening was independent of other risk factors for CRS.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Forum of Allergy & RhinologySame topicSinusitis and nasal conditionsFrench-language works237,207