Quality of life in liver transplant recipients during the Corona virus disease 19 pandemic: A multicentre study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Liver transplant recipients require specific clinical and psychosocial attention given their frailty. Main aim of the study was to assess the quality of life after liver transplant during the current pandemic. METHODS: This multicentre study was conducted in clinically stable, liver transplanted patients. Enrollment opened in June and finished in September 2021. Patients completed a survey including lifestyle data, quality of life (Short Form health survey), sport, employment, diet. To examine the correlations, we calculated Pearson coefficients while to compare subgroups, independent samples t-tests and ANOVAs. To detect the predictors of impaired quality of life, we used multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: We analysed data from 511 patients observing significant associations between quality of life's physical score and both age and adherence to Mediterranean diet (p < .01). A significant negative correlation was observed between mental score and the sedentary activity (p < .05). Female patients scored significantly lower than males in physical and mental score. At multivariate analysis, females were 1.65 times more likely to report impaired physical score than males. Occupation and physical activity presented significant positive relation with quality of life. Adherence to Mediterranean diet was another relevant predictor. Regarding mental score, female patients were 1.78 times more likely to show impaired mental score in comparison with males. Sedentary activity and adherence to Mediterranean diet were further noteworthy predictors. CONCLUSIONS: Females and subjects with sedentary lifestyle or work inactive seem to show the worst quality of life and both physical activity and Mediterranean diet might be helpful to improve it.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".