Effects of Listening to an Audiobook on Anxiety, Depression, and Quality of Life in Patients Receiving Hemodialysis: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the impact of audiobooks on anxiety, depression, and quality of life in patients undergoing hemodialysis. METHODS: We conducted a randomized controlled trial involving 60 patients receiving hemodialysis. The intervention group listened to audiobooks for 4 weeks. Data on anxiety and depression levels were collected using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and quality of life was assessed using the SF-36 Quality of Life Scale. RESULTS: Statistically significant reductions in anxiety and depression scores were observed in the intervention group following the 4-week audiobook intervention. Furthermore, the intervention group demonstrated significant improvements in quality of life parameters, specifically in energy, social functioning, physical role limitations, and mental health. The control group showed a significant improvement only in social functioning. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that audiobook interventions can effectively reduce anxiety and depression and enhance certain aspects of quality of life in patients receiving hemodialysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration number: NCT05272891.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".