MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2789846038 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwy009.190

A190 A PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF SYMPTOM BURDEN, OPIOID RISK, AND PERCEIVED BENEFITS OF NON-PHARMACOLOGICAL THERAPY IN CIRRHOSIS PATIENTS

2018· article· en· W2789846038 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mina Niazi, S Chavda, Emma P. Hjartarson, Robert J. Bailey, Puneeta Tandon, Amanda Brisebois

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCirrhosisQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationVisual analogue scaleHepatic encephalopathyOpioidInternal medicinePhysical therapyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cirrhosis is associated with magnitude of symptoms leading to disability and poor quality of life. Although opioids are effective in many cases, opioid use has been associated with increased frequency of hepatic encephalopathy, cost related to hospital admission and longer hospital stay. In other chronic disease population including cancer, non-pharmacological therapies including yoga, group therapy, and mindfulness-based stress reduction have been shown to be efficacious for reducing pain, emotional distress, and fatigue. Patient interest, current use as well as perceived benefit and barriers for utilization of non-pharmacological therapies are unclear in cirrhosis patients. Within a population of patients with cirrhosis, we aimed to: 1) assess symptom burden; 2) risk of opioid dependency; 3) willingness to consider non-pharmacological therapy for symptom management. In a prospective study, we recruited 135 patients with chronic liver disease attending Cirrhosis Care Clinic at the University of Alberta Hospital and Royal Alexandra Hospital. Our inclusion criterion for the study was documented cirrhosis on imaging in individuals 18 years of age and older. We collected data on patient demographics, symptom burden using the Edmonton Symptoms Assessment Scale (ESAS-r), perceived overall wellbeing using EuroQuol Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-VAS), and risk of opioid dependency using Opioid Risk Tool Calculator. We also assessed patients’ familiarity with non-pharmacological therapy, willingness to try these therapies and any barriers preventing them from utilizing non-pharmacological modalities. 135 patients were recruited, mean age of 60 years with 62% being male patients, Child Pugh Class: A (58%), B (36%), and C (6%). Overall health status using EQ-VAS (EQ-VAS 0–100 Scale) was rated at 63.9 ± 22. Most commonly reported symptoms included: tiredness (52%), mood disorder (40%), drowsiness (36%), and pain (22%). In our study, 57% had moderate to severe opioid risk score, with higher scores being correlated with increased risk for opioid dependency and future abuse. Majority (85%) of patients were willing to learn about non-pharmacological approaches for their symptoms with the majority preferring an in person one-on-one delivery modality. The top three perceived barriers were expense, discomfort and concerns about privacy in a group setting. Despite the relatively well-compensated status of our cirrhosis cohort, symptom burden was significant and quality of life was low. In our study, we observed significant risk of opioid dependency. Patients have a high willingness to proceed with non-pharmacological therapy, with only few noted barriers. Therefore, more research is needed surrounding non-pharmacological therapeutic options in cirrhosis patients. None

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicLiver Disease and Transplantation→French-language works237,207→