Exploring the Interplay of Humor and Quality of Life in Adults Confronting Chronic Diseases: A Comprehensive Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Chronic diseases, often referred to as non-communicable diseases (NCDs), stand as the leading global cause of mortality. Individuals grappling with chronic ailments frequently experience a decline in their overall quality of life (QoL), encompassing psychological, social, and physical dimensions of well-being. Objectives Recognizing that humor has demonstrated the potential to engender favorable effects on QoL, this systematic review seeks to explore the correlation between humor and QoL among adults contending with chronic health conditions. Methods A thorough examination of quantitative data was conducted in strict adherence to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were comprehensively searched from their inception until June 22, 2023. Furthermore, the reference lists of the included datasets and relevant review articles were exhaustively scrutinized (Figure 1). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was employed to assess the quality of eligible studies. Results A total of eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria, encompassing a diverse spectrum of chronic disease categories, including cardiovascular diseases and various types of cancer, among others. Collectively, these studies involved a participant cohort comprising 4,325 individuals. Noteworthy findings emerged, indicating a substantial association between distinct facets of humor—such as one’s sense of humor, coping humor, humor styles, and laughter—and psychological QoL. Nevertheless, the relationship between humor and physical QoL exhibited a more intricate pattern, characterized by mixed outcomes (Figure 2). Image: Image 2: Conclusions Despite the limited and inconsistent evidence across studies, humor appears to exhibit a positive association with QoL. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".