Needs of Hemodialysis Patients and Factors Affecting Them
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Of this study was to explore the needs of hemodialysis patients and the factors that affect them. MATERIAL & METHODS: The sample of the study included 141 patients undergoing hemodialysis. Data collection was performed by the method of interview using a specially designed questionnaire which served the purposes of the study. The needs were grouped into six categories. Patients were asked to answer how important was for them each of the statements in the questionnaire. Furthermore, there were collected socio-demographic characteristics, information on health status and relations with the physicians and nurses, as well as data on the incidence of the disease in their social life. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that patients evaluated as fairly important all six categories of their needs, with similar results in both sexes. Age was found to be statistically significantly associated with 'the need for support and guidance', 'the need to be informed' and 'the need to meet the emotional and physical needs', (p=0.023, p=0.012, p=0.028 respectively). Education level was found to be statistically significantly associated with all patients' needs with the exception of 'the need to trust the medical and nursing staff', (p=<0.05). Place of residence was statistically significantly associated with 'the need for support and guidance', (p=0.029). Furthermore, difficulties in relations with family members was found to be statistically significantly associated with 'the need for support, the need for communication and individualization of care', (p=0.014, p=0.040, p=0.041). After multivariate analysis, however, it was shown that the only independent factor affecting 'the need for support and guidance', 'the need for individualized care' and 'the need to meet the emotional and physical needs', was if the patients reported themselves as anxious or not (p=0,024, p=0,012 and p=0,004, respectively). In particular, patients who considered themselves anxious had 1.38, 1.5 and 1.6 points respectively higher score in the evaluation of the importance of needs compared to patients who did not consider themselves anxious. CONCLUSIONS: Factors affecting needs of hemodialysis patients are age, education level, place of residence difficulties in relations with family members as well as anxious personality as reported by the patients.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".