Quality of life of ostomized person: relationship with the care provided in stomatherapy nursing consultation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective: To analyze the relationship between the Quality of Life (QoL) and the stomatherapy nursing consultation. Method: Descriptive-correlational study with 100 ostomized adult participants, to whom a form was applied. The data were treated with SPSS software version 20.0. Results: Most ostomized (67%) presented a positive perception of QoL. This differed significantly (p < 0.05) between the types of ostomy and previous preparation in the consultation, as the colostomy patients and the individuals who booked the appointment of the stoma previously during the consultation had a better QoL. Conclusions: There is a statistical relationship between QoL, the type of ostomy and the participation in the stomatherapy nursing consultation, demonstrating the positive influence of nursing care for the ostomized. The study reinforces the importance of consultation for the adaptation of ostomized people to the new condition and improvement of their QoL.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".