Quality of life and psychosocial outcomes of adults who were pediatric solid organ transplant recipients: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of pediatric SOT recipients surviving into adulthood is increasing. Thus, understanding their psychosocial and QoL outcomes is important. We conducted a systematic review to collate existing literature examining QoL outcomes (physical functioning, psychological functioning, social functioning), as well as risk and protective factors associated with QoL, among adults who underwent SOT during childhood. METHODS: A systematic search of five databases, from inception to January 6, 2021, was conducted to identify articles that reported on QoL outcomes for adults (≥18-year of age) who received a SOT during childhood (<19-year of age). RESULTS: Twenty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Studies examined QoL across a range of SOT populations (liver, kidney, heart). QoL and psychosocial outcomes were variable; however, the majority of studies indicated QoL in this population to be similar to the general population, or at least similar to other chronic illness groups, with the exception of physical and social functioning. Factors related to a more optimal medical course, younger age at transplant and follow-up, and positive psychosocial functioning, were found to be predictive of better QoL outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: While several studies indicated QoL to be similar to the general population, the literature is limited in both quantity and quality. No study employed prospective, longitudinal methodologies to systematically evaluate QoL over time and few studies utilized normative-based measures of QoL. Furthermore, several SOT groups were under-represented in the literature (e.g., lung, intestine, multi-visceral). Nonetheless, findings have implications for intervention and clinical decision-making.
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 | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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".