Life quality for ostomized patients: a perspective in the health and nursing care process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence shows that there is association between the quality of life (QoL) of ostomized patients and the results of WHOQOL-bref questionnaire. Mensurable knowledge regarding facets and dimension of the mentioned questionnaire is highly valuable for guidance involving the multidisciplinary crew for nursing care, taken into consideration that specialized care has major influence on the QoL scores. To better assess which of these facets are strongly correlated to tue questionnaire dimensions targeting its identification and the development of internal guidelines take advantage of such information aiming to improve QoL on the one hundred and six patients served by the Ambulatory Care Program for ostomy patients in the Federal District Health Secretariat, Brazil. The questionnaire scores where correlated to the several dimensions in order to pinpoint which of those has major contribution on patients QoL, by generating correlation coefficient (square r ) and t -student tests. The facets of Physical Domains, Social Affairs and Environment are correlated with the mean score, resulting in statistically significant associations ( p < .0001). The awareness about ostomy patients’ reality may result in effective comprehensive health care of the person with ostomy, and the consequent improvement of their QoL, resulting in a process of care in health nursing, which may impact the patient's the ability to socialize and interact, reducing the impact of depression events and its consequences as well as improving the general well being of the patient in terms of self body image and self esteem as required by the Integral health care policy. Thus, the nursing care process becomes an active and continuous act demanding special actions and behaviors targeting the improvement of human potentials, focusing on enhancing the dignity of the ostomized person, for which the nursing care process is fundamental for recovering the QoL scores to better and higher levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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".