Is there any association between type of dietary fat and quality of life in hemodialysis patients? A cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Hemodialysis (HD) patients have a low quality of life (QOL), and dietary intakes may impact both somatic and psychosocial aspects of QOL. Nevertheless, the relationship between QOL and different dietary fats has not yet been evaluated. Objective The purpose of this study was to assess the association between QOL and the types/quantities of dietary fats intake in HD patients. Methods In this multi-center cross-sectional study, 251 adult patients under dialysis for at least 3 months were included. Participants’ dietary intakes were collected using a validated 168-item semi-quantitative FFQ during the past year. Moreover, to assess QOL, Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOL-SF 1/3) was used. The linear regression between QOL and different types of dietary fats was conducted. p < 0.05 was statistically significant. Results Overall, 66 women and 185 men participated in our study. Regression analysis adjusted for total calorie intake showed that there was a negative association between QOL and total fat (95% CI: −0.187, −0.043), SFA (95% CI: −0.688, −0.143), MUFA (95% CI: −0.389, −0.065) and PUFA (95% CI: −0.401, −0.056) when types of dietary fats were individually included to the regression analysis. When all types of dietary fats were simultaneously entered into the analysis, the association between QOL and MUFA (95% CI: −0.243, 1.031) and PUFA (95% CI: −1.159, 0.084) were attenuated. The regression coefficient for SFA remained significant (95% CI: −0.968, −0.138). Also, there was a marginally significant association between SFA and the risk of low QOL was observed when all types of dietary fats were simultaneously entered into the analysis (OR = 1.051, 95% CI: 0.998–1.104). Conclusion Our investigation found a negative association between SFA consumption and QOL among different types of dietary fats. Furthermore, SFA mediated the relationship between QOL, MUFA, PUFA, and total fat. So, modification of dietary fat intake could enhance QOL in HD patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".