Relationship between socio-demographic, clinical factors, and quality of life in adults living with diabetic nephropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ObjectiveThe study determines the relationship between the socio-demographic, clinical factors and quality of life among adults with diabetic nephropathy and undergoing hemodialysis.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional, descriptive study conducted among adults diagnosed with diabetic nephropathy receiving hemodialysis in a dialysis unit. The kidney specific quality of life and the general quality of life (KDQOL-SF) was used to collect data between January 2015 to July 2016. A hundred and forty participants completed the survey from the selected sample of 185 adults.ResultsAdults with complex comorbidities, stage 3, 4 and 5 chronic kidney disease, higher body mass index, and uncontrolled glycemic control were significantly associated with lower quality of life, physical and mental component summary scores.ConclusionsPoor physical functioning, role-physical, body pain, role-emotional, emotional well-being, general health, mental health scores significantly affected the quality of life in high-risk adults with diabetic nephropathy. The study demonstrated the significance of patient reported outcomes for adults with diabetic nephropathy and planning healthy lifestyle changes to improve the 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 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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".