Patient-Perceived Barriers to Lifestyle Interventions in Cirrhosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS: Sarcopenia, muscle weakness, and physical frailty are independent predictors of mortality in cirrhosis. These adverse prognostic factors are potentially modifiable with lifestyle interventions, including adequate nutritional intake and physical activity. Our aim was to identify patient-perceived barriers and enablers to these interventions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients with cirrhosis were prospectively recruited from two tertiary care liver clinics. Patients were excluded if they had hepatocellular carcinoma beyond transplant criteria, other active malignancy, or advanced chronic disease. RESULTS: A total of 127 patients (mean age: 60 ± 9 years, 58% males, and 48% with Child-Pugh-B/C (CP-B/C) disease) were included. Two-thirds of the patients had cirrhosis related to alcohol or hepatitis C. CP-B/C patients were more likely to take oral nutritional supplements (56% vs 29%) and less likely to consume animal protein daily (66% vs 85%) when compared to CP-A patients. Early satiety, altered taste, and difficulty in buying/preparing meals were more common in CP-B/C patients and even present in 20-30% of CP-A patients. Most patients reported adequate funds to purchase food. As quantified by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form, 47% reported low activity levels, with no significant differences between groups. CP-B/C patients were more fatigued with exercise, however, overall Exercise Benefits/Barriers Scale scores were similar across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to nutritional intake and physical activity are common in cirrhosis and should be evaluated and treated in all patients. Asking simple screening questions in clinic and referring at-risk patients to expert multidisciplinary providers is a reasonable strategy to address these barriers. Future research should evaluate techniques to overcome modifiable barriers and enhance enablers.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".