MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6991022738

FATTORI PSICOLOGICI DI INFLUENZA SULL’ADHERENCE AL TRATTAMENTO E SULLA QUALITA DELLA VITA IN PAZIENTI CON VASCULOPATIE. RISULTATI PRELIMINARI

2012· article· it· W6991022738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNova Science Publishers (Nova Science Publishers, Inc.) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageit
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingContext (archaeology)Alcohol intakeAnxiety
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lo studio della Qualità della Vita (QdV), dell’assetto psicologico e dell’adherence alle prescrizioni mediche in pazienti affetti da disturbi vascolari è un obiettivo indispensabile, sia per la valutazione degli outcome clinici che per la scelta di trattamenti medici adeguati (Piscione et al., 2009). In accordo con la letteratura sulle malattie croniche, intendiamo valutare il peso esercitato da ansia, depressione, strategie di coping, percezione di malattia e alessitimia sullo stato di salute e sulla QdV di pazienti con vasculopatie. METODO Il disegno di ricerca prevede la somministrazione dei seguenti questionari: The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (Zigmond e Snaith, 1983); Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced (COPE-NVI) (Sica et al., 2008); Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) (Giardini et al., 2007); Toronto Structured Interview for Alexithymia (TSIA) (Caretti et al., 2011); World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL- Bref) (World Health Organization, 1993). Verrà inoltre valutato il grado di adherence tramite le informazioni clinico-mediche. RISULTATI PRELIMINARI Allo stato attuale, i dati derivano da somministrazioni parziali a 26 pazienti (8 F, 18 M, età M=59 anni) che hanno ottenuto livelli bassi di ansia e depressione e una QdV non significativamente compromessa. L’adherence alle prescrizioni mediche risulta elevata, ad esclusione della dimensione Attività Fisica. CONCLUSIONI I dati emersi appaiono in contrapposizione con la letteratura, le osservazioni cliniche e le valutazioni delle condizioni mediche riferite dai medici, da cui emergono invece rilevanti condizioni di sofferenza psichica e scarsa adesione al regime terapeutico. Riteniamo pertanto che la questione rimandi all’adeguatezza dell’uso dei self-report in condizioni di tale complessità, e che la prosecuzione dello studio permetterà di avere una visione completa e complessa delle dinamiche psichiche in pazienti con disturbi vascolari.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.030
Science and technology studies0.0020.015
Scholarly communication0.0140.063
Open science0.0090.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNova Science Publishers (Nova Science Publishers, Inc.)Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207