MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917153538 · doi:10.11575/prism/36151

Quality of Life and Psychological Wellbeing in Patients with Vasovagal Syncope

2019· dissertation· en· W2917153538 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jessica M.Y. Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthH. Lundbeck A/SVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchVanderbilt UniversityAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsVasovagal syncopeSyncope (phonology)Quality of life (healthcare)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)MedicineInternal medicinePsychotherapistPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is the most common form of syncope. Previous findings have indicated that VVS patients experience a poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and considerable psychological distress. However, there is limited data comparing both outcomes between VVS patients and closely-matched healthy individuals, as well as identifying specific factors that affect changes in QoL over time. Aims: We aimed to identify the differences in HRQoL and psychological profile between VVS patients and a contemporary group of non-fainting healthy individuals. We also aimed to examine the change in HRQoL over time in VVS patients, as well as explore whether change differed with treatment or fainting during study follow up. Methods: The RAND 36-Item Health Survey (RAND36) or Short Form Health Survey (SF36), global health visual analogue scale (VAS), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Anxiety Sensitivity Index, and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule – Expanded Form were completed by healthy individuals, and by VVS patients at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Results: At baseline, VVS patients reported poorer HRQoL on all scales of the RAND36 and the VAS compared to healthy participants. VVS patients had significantly greater anxiety, depression, and anxiety sensitivity, as well as more negative affect and less positive affect. Over a 1-year period, patients reported improvement in all SF36 dimensions except for bodily pain. Post hoc analyses indicated that differences first occurred between baseline and 6 months for all but general health. Additionally, recent faints experienced during follow up or study drug randomization did not alter the improvements. Conclusions: The results from this thesis further support a negative relationship between VVS and a patient’s quality of life and psychological profile. Patients may benefit from a more comprehensive assessment and treatment of HRQoL, anxiety, and depression during presentation and subsequent follow up visits. Moreover, while HRQoL improves in VVS patients over time, future initiatives could identify alternative factors that may contribute to these changes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersFrench-language works237,207