Comparison of Depression, Stress, Anxiety, Cognitive Status, and Quality of Life Before and After Renal Transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic kidney disease is a prevalent and life-altering condition that significantly impacts quality of life. Kidney transplantation (KT) is an effective treatment for CKD, but it may also trigger psychological distress, including depression, anxiety, and cognitive impairment. This study aims to compare the levels of depression, anxiety, stress, cognitive status, and quality of life in KT recipients before and after surgery. METHODS: This descriptive, qualitative comparative study included 100 patients scheduled for renal transplantation at a tertiary care center in Pune, India. Participants were evaluated before and one month after the surgery using the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form, Version 1.3 (KDQOL SFv1.3) scales. The Wilcoxon signed-rank test and multiple regression analysis were applied to identify predictors of psychological outcomes. RESULTS: The study found a significant reduction in depression and cognitive impairment posttransplant. Depression decreased from 19% pretransplant to 13% posttransplant. Anxiety and stress also showed slight reductions, while cognitive impairment decreased from 29% to 19%. Additionally, there was a notable improvement in 15 out of the 17 dimensions of quality of life, particularly in physical functioning and social interactions. CONCLUSION: KT significantly improves depression, cognitive function, and overall quality of life in CKD patients, though psychological challenges may persist. Ongoing mental health support is crucial for these 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 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".