MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392862102 · doi:10.3390/healthcare12060668

Health-Related Quality of Life and Psychosocial Variables in Women with Colorectal Pelvic Floor Dysfunction: A Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4392862102 on OpenAlexaff
Rocío Molina-Barea, Mahmoud Slim, Elena P. Calandre

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPelvic floor disorders treatments
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPelvic floorMedicinePelvic floor dysfunctionAnxietyQuality of life (healthcare)Sexual dysfunctionBeck Depression InventoryFecal incontinenceBeck Anxiety InventoryPhysical therapyDistressDepression (economics)PsychosocialUrinary incontinencePsychiatryClinical psychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pelvic floor dysfunction comprises various disorders, including urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, and chronic pelvic pain. This study aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL), anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, and sexual functioning in women with pelvic floor dysfunction of colorectal etiology compared with control women. Patients were recruited from a specialized colorectal unit and controls were selected from among the patients’ friends and relatives. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected. Pelvic floor dysfunction distress and impact, HRQoL, depression, anxiety, insomnia, and sexual functioning were assessed using the following validated questionnaires: Short-Form Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory (PFDI-20), Short Form Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire (PFIQ-7), 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and Changes in Sexual Functioning Scale (CSFQ). Statistical analyses included Welch’s t-test, Fisher’s exact test, and Spearman’s correlation coefficients. Eighty-four patients and 57 controls were included. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to be obese or overweight, have had higher numbers of deliveries, more vaginal deliveries, more frequent use of forceps, and have had more associated comorbidities, mainly in the urinary, neurological, and psychiatric domains. As expected, patients scored significantly higher than controls on both the PFDI-20 and PFIQ-7 and their respective sub-scales, with the highest mean values in the patient group on the sub-scales related to the colorectal–anal domain. QoL, depression, anxiety, insomnia, and sexual functioning were significantly worse in patients than in controls (p < 0.0001 in every case). In patients, PFIQ-7 scores correlated significantly with HRQoL (p < 0.001 for the physical component and p < 0.01 for the mental component), depression (p < 0.001), anxiety (p < 0.001), insomnia (p < 0.05), and sexual functioning scores (p < 0.05). Colorectal pelvic floor dysfunction had a markedly deleterious impact on the HRQoL, depression, anxiety, sleep disturbance, and sexual functioning of patients. It is concluded that colorectal pelvic floor dysfunction exerts a considerable burden on patients’ lives. Addressing these issues in clinical settings could significantly improve patients’ well-being.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcareSame topicPelvic floor disorders treatmentsFrench-language works237,207