Symptoms and quality of life from patients undergoing hemodialysis in Switzerland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dialysis patients experience multiple symptoms impairing their quality of life. A relationship seems to exist between the cultural context and the burden of symptoms. In this study, the prevalence and severity of 30 symptoms and their relationship with quality of life among hemodialysis patients in Switzerland is explored.Methods: A cross-sectional correlation design was used with a convenience sample of 119 patients from five dialysis units. Presence and severity of symptoms were assessed with the Dialysis Symptom Index and quality of life with the WHOQOL-Bref questionnaire. Multivariate linear regressions were used to examine the relationship between the prevalence and severity of symptoms, respectively, and quality of life. T-tests and Fisher’s tests were used for the international comparisons.Results: On average, patients reported 10 symptoms and often rated these as “somewhat bothersome”. The most frequent were: lack of energy, dry skin, trouble falling asleep, trouble staying asleep, and muscle cramps. Average symptoms prevalence and severity levels were both observed to decrease patients’ quality of life, items related to physical health and psychological state having the greatest impact. Prevalence and severity of psychological symptoms and prevalence of sex-related symptoms seem to be influenced by patients’ cultural context.Conclusions: These results demonstrate that patients on chronic hemodialysis present several symptoms that affect their quality of life. Healthcare professionals should develop strategies to identify more properly these symptoms, especially sex-related and psychological symptoms.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".