Psychosocial Responses and Quality of Life among Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Patients and Their Caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the psychosocial responses and quality of life (QOL) among Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) patients and their caregivers in South Korea. Methods: A cross-sectional design was used. Purposive sample of 15 ALS patients and their 14 caregivers were recruited via Korean Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Association (KALSA) website. Demographic characteristics, hopelessness, quality of life, physical function, and caregiver burden were measured. Results: The mean period after being diagnosed with ALS was 57.73 months. The mean score of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis functional rating scale and quality of life was 21.33 (SD=11.97) and 5.70 (SD=1.23) respectively. The mean score of hopelessness was 11.87 (SD=4.72). The caregivers' mean score of McGill quality of life was 4.29 (SD=1.46), and the mean score of McGill quality of life-single item scale was 4.29 (SD=2.02). Conclusion: Since the cause of ALS has not been identified and cure is yet to be discovered, supportive care should be provided for not only quality of life but hope of patients. The findings may be used to develop knowledge based nursing intervention for patients diagnosed with ALS and their caregivers.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".