Feasibility of a Multidomain Resiliency Assessment in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Requiring Surgery: A Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The resiliency of patients who have advanced heart failure (HF) and undergo a physical stressor such as heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device implantation has yet to be studied in the physical, cognitive, and psychosocial domains. The primary aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of a multidomain resiliency assessment in patients who have advanced HF and require surgery. METHODS: A battery of assessments in each of the domains was completed at baseline before surgical intervention, after intensive care discharge, and 3 and 6 months after surgery. Feasibility was assessed through completion rates, time required to complete the assessments, and qualitative feedback from assessors. RESULTS: Although various completion rates were noted at different time points, high completion rates were seen for grip strength, the modified Fried frailty phenotype, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. Additionally, when controlled for patients who were medically restricted from physical function, the Short Physical Performance Battery, gait speed, and the 30-second chair stand test also had high completion rates. A trend toward return to baseline status or an improvement in baseline status was observed in all physical and cognitive assessments and most psychosocial assessments at 3 and 6 months. Minimal change was noted in the Brief Resilience Scale questionnaire. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrates that a multidomain assessment of resiliency is feasible in patients with advanced HF. Future studies are needed to help determine specific assessments or patient factors that would help predict positive postsurgical outcomes in this population. IMPACT: This study has implications for clinical practice on the most feasible assessments in multiple domains for patients who have advanced HF and are being evaluated for heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device.
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".