Quality of life following heart valve replacement in the elderly.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate both long-term functional status and quality of life (QoL) following valvular replacement surgery in octogenarians. The influence of gender and discharge location was also examined. METHODS: A total of 133 patients (age range: 80-89 years) who underwent surgical valve replacement between January 2003 and December 2006 was identified. Two questionnaires evaluating QoL (SF-12v2 and MLHFQ), as well as a demographic questionnaire, were sent to these patients. RESULTS: The response rate was 64.4%. Among the participants, the mean NYHA functional class improved from 2.7 to 1.4 after surgery. Men showed results similar to those of the age-matched general Canadian population on the mental and physical component scales of the SF-12v2. The data on women were similar to those of the general population on the physical component scale, but their scores were significantly lower on the mental component scale of the SF-12v2. Further analysis of the results comparing discharge location for each gender revealed that women discharged to a convalescence resource had significantly better QoL scores than those discharged to home with regards to the physical component scale of the SF-12v2, the total score of the MLHFQ, and the physical dimension score of the MLHFQ. CONCLUSION: Patients aged > or = 80 years benefit from heart valve replacement surgery in terms of both QoL and functional status. Women may be at increased risk of a decline in their emotional well-being and, postoperatively, may benefit more from convalescence than from discharge to home.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".