Self-Reported Employment Status and Social Participation After Successful Kidney Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Kidney transplantation (KTX) is considered the treatment of choice for most individuals with end-stage kidney disease. The purpose of this study was to assess the employment status and social participation after successful KTX. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study. Eligible participants were patients who received a transplant ≥1 year ago and who were previously on hemodialysis (HD) for ≥1 year. Two hundred individuals participated in this study. RESULTS: A significant number (93.5%) of patients reported they were working prior to HD versus 35% while on HD. Only 14% reported receiving disability benefits prior to HD versus 75% receiving disability while on HD. Comparing transplant recipients with pre-HD patients, 35.5% versus 93.5% reported working, and 74.5% versus 14% reported receiving disability benefits, respectively. After transplant, patients were more likely to join recreational clubs, travel frequently, and participate in recreational/religious activities and social events than when they were on HD. CONCLUSION: Posttransplant, these individuals are more likely to participate in social and leisure activities, but the majority did not resume employment and continued to receive disability payments. Future studies could explore barriers to employment in patients who underwent successful transplantation and the causes and factors as to why these individuals continue to receive disability benefits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".