Sex Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes and Perception of Ascites Burden Among Outpatients With Decompensated Cirrhosis and Ascites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Perception of the ascites burden and its effects on quality of life may be different between sexes. This study assessed sex differences in perception of ascites burden and its impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with recurrent or refractory ascites. METHODS: The North American Consortium for the Study of End-stage Liver Disease prospectively enrolled outpatients with cirrhosis and large ascites requiring repeat large volume paracenteses. Demographics, laboratory results, comorbidities, medications, frailty measurements, and self-reported questionnaires related to functional status, physical activities, and HRQoL (generic = Short Form 36 and ascites specific = Ascites Questionnaire) were compared between sexes. RESULTS: In total, 392 men (59.6 ± 10.7 years) and 184 women (59.5 ± 11.1 years) with predominantly alcohol-related liver disease (51% and 43%, respectively) and median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease-Na: 13 were enrolled. Both groups had similar comorbidities and cirrhosis complications, ascites duration and severity, and frailty scores ( P = 0.94). Women had more symptoms related to their ascites (Ascites Questionnaire score = 66 ± 21 vs 60 ± 21 in men, P = 0.001) (higher value = feeling worse). 35% of women felt depressed vs 22% of men ( P = 0.0009), with lower mental but not physical functioning components of Short Form 36 ( P = 0.019). Women continued to conduct their daily activities as adequately as men as indicated by Duke Status Activity Index ( P = 0.27) and Godin Leisure Activity Index ( P = 0.47). DISCUSSION: Women with cirrhosis and ascites experienced worse emotional HRQoL than men without difference in daily function. Our analyses underscore the differences in the lived experience of women vs men with cirrhosis and highlight the need for patient-reported metrics to provide patient-centered care.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".