Comparison of sleep quality, shoulder function, and quality of life in patients with different-sized rotator cuff tears
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Many patients with rotator cuff tears suffer from nocturnal shoulder pain resulting in sleep disturbance, inability on shoulder function, and reduced quality of life. Aims and Objective: This study aimed to compare patients with different sizes of rotator cuff tears (RCTs) concerning sleep quality, shoulder function, quality of life, and emotional state. Materials and Methods: Forty-four patients (mean age 49.43±10.71) with different size of RCT were included in this prospective cross-sectional study. Patients were divided into two groups according to RCT size diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging. Patients were evaluated with Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Constant Murley (CM) score, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Results: There was no significant difference between patients with small and large size RCT in terms of sleep quality, shoulder functionality, quality of life and emotional state (p=0.841, p=0.258, p=0.916, p=0.936, respectively). Conclusion: We demonstrated that patients with RCT had poor sleep quality, decreased shoulder function, poor quality of life, and normal emotional status, regardless of the tear size.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".