Assessment of quality of life and psychological condition of women with chronic inflammatory processes of the pelvic organs on the background of pelvic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective: was to assess the psychological status and quality of life of women in the treatment of recurrent pelvic inflammatory disease with chronic pelvic pain syndrome.Materials and methods. We observed 100 women of reproductive age who suffered from chronic pelvic pain syndrome in chronic inflammatory processes of the pelvic organs. All women were prescribed antibacterial therapy in combination with antihypoxants and antiplatelet agents. The first group included women (n=48) who were prescribed analgesics domestically due to existing contraindications to the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The second group of women (n=52) received a rectally non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. The second group of women (n=52) received a rectally nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent. Patients were interviewed 3 months after treatment: using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), the McGill Questionnaire, the Spielberger–Hanin Questionnaire, the Depression Center of the US Center for Epidemiological Research, the Beck Depression Rating Scale, and the SF-36 Questionnaire.Results. According to the results of the assessment of quality of life and changes in psychological state, we noticed the following differences. In the group of women who received analgesic medium before muscle therapy, the change in muscle changed but slightly compared with the group of women who were offered the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Indicators of quality of life and psychological condition in women of the second group have significantly improved.Conclusions. The results of this study indicate the relationship and comprehensive approach in the treatment of pelvic inflammatory disease, which is accompanied by pelvic pain.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".