MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166442657 · doi:10.1136/gut.47.3.444

Quality of life measurement in gastrointestinal and liver disorders

2000· review· en· W2166442657 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Borgaonkar

Bibliographic record

VenueGut · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical CentreMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)DiseasePopulationAffect (linguistics)Chronic diseaseActivities of daily livingProxy (statistics)Chronic painGerontologyIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyEnvironmental healthPsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern medicine has had a considerable impact on mortality rates for serious illness. Many chronic diseases which have previously been associated with an increased mortality now have survival rates approaching those of the background population. However, chronic diseases such as cancer, chronic pain syndromes, and chronic inflammatory conditions impose a considerable burden on families, the health care system, and society. Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is a concept that has developed from the need to estimate the impact of such chronic diseases. HRQOL measurement is a conceptual framework which attempts to predict daily function and well being based on subjective attitudes and experiences of physical, social, and emotional health. It has been evaluated predominantly from the patient's viewpoint as proxy respondents appear to underestimate the full effect of chronic illness on functional status. Measuring HRQOL in clinical research is most frequently undertaken using multi-item questionnaires to estimate daily function. Factors which affect HRQOL can be broadly classed as disease related and disease independent. The use of different assessment techniques permits comparisons between and within disorders. Generic and disease specific instruments used together enhance the ability to direct treatment for individuals and patient populations. Psychometrically sound questionnaires must be used. However, the type of instrument and research methods adopted depend on the question of interest. We have attempted to catalogue and critically assess the disease specific instruments used in the assessment of chronic gastrointestinal disease.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations221
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGutSame topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207