Challenges faced by people with a stoma: peristomal body profile risk factors and leakage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The Ostomy Life Study 2019 aimed to obtain a better understanding of the challenges faced by people with stoma. Methods: Online survey with participants from 17 countries. Findings: Of the 54 614 individuals invited to take part, 5187 responded; 62% of the respondents avoided physical and social activities because of their stoma and 37% had never consulted their stoma care nurse to have the fit of their stoma product checked. In a subgroup receiving questions on leakage (n=4209), output under the baseplate and leakage onto clothes were experienced within the previous month by 76% and 26% of respondents, respectively. Higher chance of leakage was associated with an irregular stoma shape and peristomal body profile; a stoma level at or below the skin surface; and the presence of creases, folds and other changes in the peristomal area. Conclusion: Leakage and access to a stoma care nurse to provide the necessary care and guidance remain important concerns for individuals with a stoma.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".