Health-related quality of life in pediatric patients with intestinal failure without neurodevelopmental delay: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intestinal failure (IF) is a broad term encompassing various conditions that hinder the body's ability to absorb nutrients for growth and maintenance. These conditions can significantly affect child's well-being, leading to physical limitations, psychological distress, and social isolation. We aimed to evaluate the available data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in pediatric patients with IF and without neurodevelopmental delay. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. All observational studies of pediatric patients (< 18 years) with IF which measured HRQOL and with evidence of absence of neurodevelopmental delay were included, without language or date restrictions, up to June 2024. We did separate random-effects meta-analyses for overall HRQOL and subgroup domains. Evidence from observational studies was synthesised as differences between standardised mean differences (SMDs) for all subgroup domains. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic and the Cochran Q test. The quality of the evidence was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42024561812. RESULTS: Of 491 records identified, 14 were eligible and data were available for 12 studies, all of which had a fair/good quality. The included studies involved a pooled sample of 510 participants (mean age = 7.0 ± 3.6 years). The analysis disclosed that compared to healthy children, pediatric patients with IF had lower overall quality of life in both child- and parent-report (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD]= -0.62; 95% CI [-0.80, -0.43]; p < 0.001, and SMD= -0.70; 95% CI [-1.11, -0.28]; p < 0.001, respectively), except for emotional and social domains (SMD[child] = -0.23; 95% CI [ -0.38, -0.08]; p = 0.001 Vs SMD[parent]= -0.23; 95% CI [ -0.60, 0.14]; p = 0.21, and SMD[child] = -0.40; 95% CI [ -0.70, -0.10]; p = 0.007 Vs SMD[parent]= -0.24; 95% CI [ -0.62, 0.14]; p = 0.21, respectively), where parents overestimate emotional and social HRQOL of their children. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the significant impact of IF on well-being of pediatric patients. Targeted interventions addressing both physical and psychosocial needs are crucial to improve HRQOL in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".