Reduction in Anxiety and Depression Scores Associated with Improvement in Quality of Life in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The aim of this study was to examine the associations among depression, anxiety and health-related quality of life and predictors of improvement of quality of life in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Methods This was a prospective cohort study conducted in the gastroenterology clinic at McMaster University Medical Center in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada from May 2014 to March 2015. We included 60 adult patients above the age of 18 years old with a diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease. We assessed anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) using the Short Inflammatory Bowel Disease questionnaire (SIBDQ) at baseline and after 6 months. Linear regression was performed to estimate the associations among depression, anxiety and predictors of improvement in health-related quality of life. Results The anxiety scores decreased over the span of 6 months (median HADS-A baseline 9.00 [interquartile range {IQR} 6 to 12], and median HADS-A 6 months 7.00 [IQR 3.75 to 7.00]). There was a moderate negative correlation between anxiety (baseline r = −0.510, and 6-month r = −0.620; P < 0.001), depression (baseline r = −0.630, and 6-month r = −0.670; P < 0.001) and HRQoL scores. Using a multivariate linear regression model, elevated HADS score were associated with lower SIBDQ scores at baseline (Beta coefficient −0.696 [95% confidence interval {CI} −1.51 to −0.842]; P < 0.001). Lower SIBDQ score at baseline predicted decreased SIBDQ at 6 months (Beta coefficient 0.712 [95% CI 0.486 to 1.02]; P < 0.001). Conclusion Anxiety and depression are frequently seen in inflammatory bowel disease patients and lead to poor HRQoL. Psychological comorbidities may contribute to maladaptive behaviours and difficult disease management.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".