Impact of surgery on quality of life in Crohn's disease patients: final results of Czech cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Crohns disease (CD) belongs to chronic diseases that highly affect the patient´s quality of life (QoL). The effect of the disease and impairment of QoL in CD patients is already known. The aim was to assess how surgical treatment influences the patients QoL and determine factors that can affect postoperative QoL. METHODS AND PATIENTS: We compared the QoL before and after surgery in patients who had undergone a bowel resection at our department due to CD between 2010-2016. The patients filled in a standardized QLQ-CR29 questionnaire to assess QoL in the preoperative period and the postoperative period after a 2-month interval. The control groups were CD patients who had not undergone surgical treatment (bowel resection) and a healthy cohort. In the QoL evaluation, 132 patients with CD who had undergone surgery (bowel resection), 83 patients with CD without an operation and 104 healthy subjects were enrolled. RESULTS: 104 of the operated patients experienced a postoperative improvement of the overall QoL (78.8 %), 2 patients did not register any changes in QoL (1.5 %) and 26 patients (19.7 %) experienced a worsening of their postoperative QoL. The results were statistically significant (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We detected a significant improvement of the overall QoL after surgical resection in CD patients (measured 2 months after surgery). Gender was identified as the only statistically relevant factor with influence on postoperative QoL.Key words: bowel resection - Crohn´s disease - Czech cohort - inflammatory bowel disease - quality of life - surgical treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".