Percepción subjetiva del tiempo y evaluación del estado emocional de pacientes con enfermedad crónica avanzada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Characterizing emotional state and perception over the years in patients with advanced chronic disease, and compare it to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Methodology: It is a quantitative descriptive and transversal observational study in which we deepen the patient’s emotional state. Based on the administration of a questionnaire to collect demographic and clinical variables, in which the Karnofsky Index, Bayes Time Subjective Perceived Scale, Brief Scale of Introspection of the State of Mind, Scale of Evaluation of Edmonton Symptoms and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Results: Patients with advanced chronic illness presented anxious and depressive symptomatology’s high levels and a negative mood‘s predominance, existing a correlation between patients’ answers to Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the identified emotional states through the Brief Mood Introspection Scale. Over time, these patients perceive it as slow or very slow, existing interrelation with the presence of anxious and depressive symptomatology. Conclusions: The subjective perception of time and the description of mood using the Brief Mood Introspection Scale can be a good tool for the emotional distress detection.
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 | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".