Upper-Limb Disability and the Severity of Lymphedema Reduce the Quality of Life of Patients with Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is characterized by arm swelling, pain, and discomfort, reducing the quality of life (QoL) of affected individuals. BRCL is caused via the blockage or disruption of the lymphatic vessels following cancer treatments, leading to an accumulation of fluid in the affected arm. While current BCRL rehabilitation treatments seek to reduce arm swelling, our study aimed to examine the impact of both the magnitude of lymphedema (ΔVolume) and arm disability on three dimensions of QoL: social, physical, and psychological. Using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the Upper Limb Lymphedema 27 questionnaire (ULL) in a group of 30 patients, we found that the magnitude of lymphedema (ΔVolume) was associated with the social dimension of QoL (r = 0.37, p = 0.041), but not with other dimensions. On the other hand, arm disability was associated with all evaluated dimensions of QoL (social, physical, and psychological: p < 0.001, p = 0.019, and p = 0.050 (borderline), respectively). These findings suggest that BCRL rehabilitation strategies should not only aim to reduce the magnitude of lymphedema but should also seek to improve or preserve arm functionality to enhance the QoL of BCRL patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".