Influence of selected determinants on the quality of life and emotional control in patients allergic to Hymenoptera venom and treated with immunotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: One of the main causes of anaphylaxis in Europe is Hymenoptera stings.Epidemiological data indicate that insect venom hypersensitivity concerns up to 5.0-7.5% of the population.Aim: To assess the influence of selected clinical and socio-demographic factors on the tests used in the study: WHO-QOL-BREF (World Health Organization Quality of Life-Brief) and CECS (Courtauld Emotional Control Scale). Material and methods:The research was conducted among patients diagnosed with Hymenoptera venom allergy, treated with immunotherapy.The following socio-demographic and clinical factors were evaluated: gender, age, place of residence, marital status, education, professional activity, financial status, type of allergy and duration of therapy.The research was carried out in 2014-2015 in the Chair and Clinic of Allergology, Clinical Immunology and Internal Diseases, Jan Biziel University Hospital No. 2 in Bydgoszcz.The study was conducted by means of a diagnostic survey using an interview.Results: Quality of life varies significantly depending on age, education, professional activity and financial conditions.The type of allergy significantly differentiates the value of CECS in the sample.People allergic to bee venom have a higher CECS level = 53.54compared to people allergic to wasp venom, which show a lower CECS level = 49.03.Conclusions: Quality of life varies depending on age, education, professional activity and financial conditions.A higher quality of life is found in the youngest people, with better education, professionally active and declaring good financial conditions.Patients diagnosed with a bee venom allergy have a higher level of emotional control.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".