Quality of Life Among Informal Caregivers of Patients With Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a common, chronic neurological condition that severely affects individuals by causing a range of disabling symptoms, frequently at a time around the peak of their careers. Subsequently, individuals with DCM often become dependent on informal care arrangements. The significant economic contribution of informal care and its burden on care providers are becoming increasingly recognized. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to measure the quality of life of DCM informal caregivers and provide preliminary insight into possible contributing factors. METHODS: Carers of individuals with DCM completed a Web-based survey hosted by Myelopathy.org, an international DCM charity. Carer quality of life was assessed in the form of caregiver happiness and 7 dimensions of carer burden using the Care-Related Quality of Life (CarerQol) instrument. The relationships between patient disease severity, patient pain, and carer quality of life were investigated. Differences in carer quality of life were assessed across patient and carer demographic groups, including between UK and US carers. RESULTS: DCM caregivers experienced substantial burden as a result of their caregiving (mean CarerQol-7D=64.1; 95% CI 58.8-69.5) and low happiness (mean CarerQol-VAS [Visual Analog Scale]=6.3; 95% CI 5.7-6.9). Burden was high and happiness was low in DCM carers when compared with a large, mixed-disease study of adult informal carers where CarerQol-7D was 79.1 and CarerQol-VAS was 7.1. No significant relationship was found between DCM carer quality of life and patient disease severity and pain scores. DCM carer quality of life appeared uniform across all patient and carer demographic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Caring for individuals with DCM is associated with reduced quality of life in the form of significant burden and reduced happiness. Reductions appear greater in DCM than in other diseases investigated. However, no simple relationship was identified between individual patient or carer factors and carer quality of life.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".