Assessment of pain in patients with primary immune deficiency
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary immune deficiency (PID) patients may develop acute or chronic pain. Pain has not been studied in this population until now. OBJECTIVES: This study systematically assessed the pain of various durations in PID patients using validated pain questionnaires. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), already validated in the Arabic language, was used to ascertain the characteristics and severity of pain. Additionally, an Arabic version of the Neuropathic Pain Questionnaire-Short Form (NPQ-SF) was employed to evaluate neuropathic pain in the same group of patients. RESULTS: Forty-six patients participated in the study. The mean age of the patients was 25 years. The most commonly diagnosed PID was a common variable immune deficiency (32.6%), followed by severe combined immune deficiency (19.57%). Based on the SF-MPQ, the pain was experienced by 30.4 % of the subjects who participated in the study; 57% of whom were on regular pain medications. The most common site reported for pain was the abdomen (35.7%). The mean duration of pain was 36.1 days ± 34.6 days. The most common comorbidities in these patients were bronchiectasis, followed by immune thrombocytopenic purpura, and scoliosis. None of the PID patients had significant neuropathic pain based on NFQ-SF. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the prevalence as well as the severity and duration of pain in PID patients. There were significantly more subjects who had continuous pain. Treatment of pain in PID patients will have a significant effect on improving their 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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it