Long-term incidence of depression in rectal cancer patients with or without stoma: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Significant improvements have been made in the surgical treatment of rectal cancer with a higher sphincter-saving rate without compromising oncologic results. There have been studies about the quality of life of rectal cancer patients after surgery. However, no study has reported the long-term annual incidence of depression after rectal cancer surgery according to stoma status. The objective of this study was to determine the annual incidence of depression after rectal cancer surgery and the factors affecting it, especially the prevalence of depression according to the presence or duration of a stoma. Methods: Using the Korea National Health Insurance Service database, patients who underwent radical surgery for rectal cancer from 2002 to 2019 were searched. We analyzed the incidence and risk factors of depression in patients who underwent radical surgery for rectal cancer according to stoma status. Results: Annual incidence of depression in rectal cancer patients was decreasing annually for 15 years after surgery. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of depression according to the stoma status. However, the diagnosis of depression within 1 year after surgery was statistically significantly increased in the permanent stoma group. Conclusion: There was no difference in the overall incidence of depressive disorders among patients with rectal cancer based on their stoma status. However, a permanent stoma seems to increase the incidence in the first year after surgery. Education and intensive assessments of depressive disorders in patients with permanent stoma within 1 year after surgery are needed, particularly for female patients who are under 50 years old.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".