Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fatigue is a main patient reported outcome of chronic hepatitis C (HCV) infection; yet its contributors are unknown. Objectives: The study (1) evaluated fatigue predictors, (2) tested the mediating role of fatigue cognitions, (3) screened for sleep disorders, and (4) explored fatigue from patients’ perspectives. Participants: Both sexes (age>18 years, N = 115) with chronic HCV infection. Design: Cross-sectional. Results: Sixty percent reported severe fatigue (FSS≥4). Fatigue perceptions were the main predictors of fatigue (ß=.58, bias corrected CI = .070-.163). Fatigue perceptions mediated the relationship between comorbidities and fatigue. Half of the sample reported clinically significant symptoms of insomnia and/or sleep apnea. Eight main fatigue themes were endorsed by the participants. Conclusions: Fatigue and sleep disorders were clinically significant issues. Fatigue cognitions may contribute to severe fatigue outcomes. Significance: Integrating the findings into existing sleep and fatigue treatments could improve clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".