Application of solution⁃focused brief therapy in elderly patients with chronic heart failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract [Objective]To explore application effects of solution⁃focused brief therapy(SFBT)in elderly patients with chronic heart failure(CHF).[Methods]Totally 108 elderly patients with CHF in our department were selected as research subjects from January 2017 to December 2018.The patients were randomly divided into SFBT group and control group by using random number table method,54 cases in each group.Patients in control group was given regular health education and psychological care.And patients in SFBT group was given SFBT on basis of intervention in control group.Depression,happiness,self⁃perceived burden,heart function and nursing satisfaction were compared between two groups.[Results]After 4 weeks intervention,scores of Hamilton Depression Scale(HAMD),Self⁃Rating Depression Scale(SDS)and Self⁃Perceived Burden Scale(SPBS)in two groups were all lower than before intervention(<0.05).Score of Memorial University of Newfoundland Scale of Happiness(MUNSH)was significantly higher than before intervention(<0.05).Compared with control group,scores of HAMD,SDS and SPBS were lower in SFBT group(<0.05).And scores of MUNSH was higher in SFBT group(<0.05).After 4 weeks intervention,the 6⁃min walking distances of patients in two groups were longer(<0.05).And walking distances of patients in SFBT group were longer than those of control group(<0.05).After 4 weeks intervention,patients' satisfaction in control group was(93.91±0.34)% and that of SFBT group was (95.94±0.45)%.The difference between two groups was statistically significant(<0.01).[Conclusions]The implementation of SFBT on basis of routine health education and psychological care can significantly improve depression and self perceived burden of CHF patients,increase 6⁃min walking distance,and improve happiness index and satisfaction of patients.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".