Health-related quality of life in severe hypersensitivity reactions: focus on severe allergic asthma and hymenoptera venom anaphylaxis—a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Growing evidence reveals the important role of clinical psychological factors in chronic-immune diseases. The aim of this study was to investigate Health-Related Quality of Life (HR-QoL), depression, anxiety, and alexithymia in patients with severe hypersensitivity reactions such as Severe Allergic Asthma (SAA) and Hymenoptera Venom Anaphylaxis (HVA). Methods The Short-Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36), the Beck Depression Inventory Questionnaire (BDI-II), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) were used to assess HR-QoL and clinical psychological features of patients with SAA and HVA. Results Overall, 78 patients were recruited. Patients with SAA (n = 35) reported lower scores for physical functioning [65 (58–75) vs. 90 (85–95); p = <0.001], role limitations due to physical health [25 (0–50) vs. 62 (50–75); p = 0.004], bodily pain [47.5 (41.1–61.3) vs. 55.5 (55–96); p = 0.001], general health [40 (30–60) vs. 70 (50–80); p = 0.0003] and social functioning [50 (37.5–62.5) vs. 62.5 (54.9–75); p = 0.007] while higher scores for depressive symptoms [14 (11–15.4) vs. (9.5 (6–15.4); p = 0.05)] compared to HVA patients (n = 43). All the dimensions of SF-36 were negatively correlated with anxiety (r from −0.26 to −0.66; pall < 0.01) and depressive symptoms (r from −0.44 to −0.73; pall < 0.001). Alexithymia was negatively correlated with vitality (r = −0.28; p = 0.02) and mental health (r = −027; p = 0.03). Additionally, patients with alexithymia (38% of participants) showed higher levels of depressive symptoms [9.5 (10–19) vs. 14 (6–13.9); p = 0.005] and anxiety levels [31 (27.9–35) vs. 24 (16–33.9); p = 0.02]; they also showed less vitality [40 (39.9–50) vs. 55 (50–60) p = 0.01], social functioning [50 (37.5–62.5) vs. 62.5 (50 vs. 75); p = 0.01] and mental health [48 (44–60) vs. 68 (56–76); p = 0.004]. Conclusion Clinical psychological features due to severe hypersensitive reactions may contribute to the patient’s perceived HR-QoL. Focused clinical psychological interventions should be promoted to improve the clinical management of such conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".