Effects of adult attachment on health outcomes among couples facing ovarian cancer and the mediating role of dyadic coping
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Ovarian cancer is commonly diagnosed at a late stage of illness, raising significant challenges to health-related quality of life (QOL). Increasingly, cancer is conceptualized as an interpersonal stressor that significantly impacts patients as well as their spouses. It has been suggested that adult attachment significantly impacts health outcomes by way of dyadic processes. The present study used the actor partner interdependence model (APIM) to examine the dyadic effects of adult attachment and dyadic coping on QOL, and whether dyadic coping mediated the associations between attachment and QOL. Methods: Couples (N=106) facing ovarian cancer were recruited from a comprehensive cancer centre in Toronto, ON. Attachment was measured by the Experiences in Close Relationships Scale – Revised, dyadic coping was measured by the Dyadic Coping Inventory, and QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Treatment. APIM analyses evaluated within person and cross-dyadic effects. Role (patients compared with spouses) was examined as a moderator. Results: There were significant within person effects of anxious attachment on physical, social, emotional, and functional QOL. There were also significant within person effects of avoidant attachment on social, emotional, and functional QOL. Positive and negative dyadic coping demonstrated significant within person effects on social and functional QOL. There were no significant cross-dyadic effects nor was there evidence of moderation by role. The within person association between avoidant attachment and social QOL was significantly mediated by positive dyadic coping. The within person association between anxious attachment and social QOL was significantly mediated by positive and negative dyadic coping. Additionally, there was a significant indirect cross-dyadic effect, such that greater anxious attachment reported by one partner was associated with less positive dyadic coping and subsequently less social QOL reported by the other partner. Discussion: Adult attachment and coping as a couple are important considerations in understanding QOL among both patients and spouses. Intervention strategies to address attachment, and the behavioural system associated with attachment, such as dyadic coping, may be useful in addressing impaired individual well-being. Future studies should consider additional dyadic processes that may account for the negative effects of attachment on QOL such as intimacy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».