[P1–630]: THE IMPACT OF PAIN ON QUALITY OF LIFE AND THE MEDIATING ROLE OF ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING AND DEPRESSIVE SYMPTOMS IN SEVERE DEMENTIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pain is a common problem among older adults, and it is estimated that ≥50% of nursing home residents with dementia experience pain on a regular basis. Pain is associated with a higher occurrence of depression, and it also affects activities of daily living and care activities in older adults. Furthermore, previous research has shown that pain in nursing homes residents with dementia affects their quality of life to varying degrees. However, we do not know how pain exerts its effect on quality of life in this population. Therefore, the aim of this study is to quantify how the relationship between pain and quality of life in nursing home residents with severe dementia can be explained by depressive symptoms and activities of daily living. Cross-sectional baseline data from a cluster-randomised controlled trial were used. A total of 112 inpatients with a dementia diagnosis, lacking self- report capacity or who were nonverbal were included. Registered nurses collected data on quality of life (QUALID), pain (Doloplus-2), activities of daily living (Physical Self-Maintenance Scale) and depressive symptoms (Cornell). Mediation analysis was performed with Ordinary Least Squares linear regression. The total and direct effect of pain on quality of life were statistically significant. Both activities of daily living and depressive symptoms partially mediated the relationship between pain and quality of life. Parallel multiple mediator model: pain (X), QoL (Y), depressive symptoms (M1) and ADL (M2).
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".