Health-Related Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders Most Commonly Associated With Zika-Virus Infection: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In this systematic review, we synthesize the current evidence on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for the two of the most relevant outcomes of Zika virus infection in humans, microcephaly and Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS). METHODS: We searched the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, WHO's ICTRP clinical trials registries database and PROSPERO. Search terms included quality of life, microcephaly, and Guillain-Barré Syndrome. We included primary studies where HRQoL was quantitatively assessed for microcephaly and GBS using validated instruments. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tools to assess the risk of bias of individual studies. RESULTS: From a total of 1,657 abstracts screened and 66 full texts reviewed, 21 studies met the eligibility criteria; one study for microcephaly and 20 for GBS. Adjusted disutilities for microcephaly compared to a normative childhood utility ranged from -0.745 to -0.820. For GBS, time traded-off the expected lifetime ranged from 16 days to 3 years. HRQoL follows the clinical course of GBS, with lower scores in the first months, recovery within the first year post onset, and stabilization after one year. CONCLUSIONS: Included studies reported a wide range of HRQoL for GBS, due in part to a high level of heterogeneity in methods, inclusion criteria, follow-up and reporting of results. Opportunities exist for primary studies assessing the longitudinal HRQoL over the entire course of the diseases to inform clinical practice, economic evaluations and health policy.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".