Exploring the Impact of Anosmia on Daily Living: An Examination of Residents in Benghazi, Libya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this study was to investigate how patients with anosmia cope with their daily lives in the second-largest city in Libya, Benghazi. Three dimensions are used to examine: (1) quality of life (QOL); (2) personal safety; and (3) social life. The data of the 34 patients was collected by distributing a questionnaire in two medical centres in Benghazi, Libya. After conducting the One-Sample Wilcoxon Signed Rank test and the Kruskal-Wallis test, the results demonstrate that the anosmia has no statistically significant effect on the QOL or personal safety. The results of social life, on the other hand, found that anosmia has no serious negative impact on patients’ social lives. Furthermore, the results reveal that there are no statistically significant differences in questionnaire replies between patients with different ages, durations of anosmia, and genders, except that it found a statistically significant difference between patients with different anosmia durations and the QOL.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".