Caregiver burden in Bardet-Biedl syndrome: findings from the CARE-BBS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) is a rare, genetically heterogeneous obesity syndrome associated with hyperphagia. Given the early onset of BBS symptoms in childhood and multifaceted complications, this study aimed to quantify the caregiver burden associated with BBS. METHODS: A cross-sectional, multi-country survey of caregivers from the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), Canada, and Germany was designed to quantify the extent of caregiver burden associated with obesity and hyperphagia symptoms (i.e., uncontrollable hunger) among patients with BBS. RESULTS: A total of 242 caregivers across the four countries met the inclusion criteria and completed the survey. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age of the caregivers was 41.9 (6.7) years, and the mean (SD) age of individuals with BBS in their care was 12.0 (3.7) years. Hyperphagia contributed to a BBS diagnosis in 230 of 242 individuals (95.0%). On average, caregivers used eight different weight management approaches for those in their care and expressed a strong desire for more effective weight management methods. Based on the Impacts of Hyperphagia: Caregiver version, patients' hyperphagia had a moderate-to-severe impact on caregiver mood (56.6%), sleep (46.6%), and relationships (48.0%). Caregivers reported experiencing a high level of personal strain (mean [SD], 17.1 [2.9]) and family impact (mean [SD] score, 26.0 [3.8]) due to BBS, as measured by the Revised Impact on Family Scale. Among caregivers in the workforce, there also was high impairment in total work productivity (mean [SD], 60.9% [21.4%]) due to caring for patients with BBS according to the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment. More than half (53%) of the caregivers reported spending over 5,000 out-of-pocket in local currency for medical expenses for the patient with BBS in their care. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity and hyperphagia have negative impacts on the lives of caregivers of patients with BBS. The burden is demonstrated to be multifaceted, with various components that may interact with and confound each other, including intensive weight management efforts, productivity loses, impaired family dynamics and out-of-pocket medical expenses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".