The Effect of Nursing Care Based on Kolcaba's Comfort Theory on Symptom Severity and Comfort of Hemodialysis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The present study was conducted to investigate the effect of nursing care structured according to Kolcaba's comfort theory and given to hemodialysis patients on their symptom severity and comfort. DESIGN: This quasi-experimental study was conducted with 46 patients; 22 were in the intervention group and 24 were in the control group, who received treatment in the hemodialysis unit of a training and research hospital in Türkiye between November 2021 and May 2022. METHODS: The Patient Information Form (PIF), Dialysis Symptom Index (DSI) and Hemodialysis Comfort Scale-Version II (HDCS-II) were used to collect data. RESULTS: While the mean DSI scores decreased in the intervention group over time, they increased in the control group. The mean score obtained from the overall HDCS-II increased over time in three follow-ups performed at different times in the intervention group. The mean score obtained from the overall HDCS-II decreased over time in three follow-ups performed at different times in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, nursing care structured according to Kolcaba's Comfort Theory given to hemodialysis patients reduced the severity of the symptoms in the participants and increased their comfort levels.
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 | 0.001 | 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".