Psychological Distress, Social Support, and Disease Activity in Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to compare the psychological status of patients in active and inactive disease states, to assess social support, and to identify correlates of psychological distress in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted in 200 patients (mean age 36.7 yr [SD = 14.8], 119 [59.5%] female) with long-standing IBD who were seen in tertiary care. Psychosocial assessments included psychological distress (Symptom Checklist-90R), social support (Social Support Questionnaire-6), perceived stress (Perceived Stress Scale-10), and recent minor stressful events (Weekly Stress Inventory). Disease activity was assessed with the Harvey Bradshaw Index. RESULTS: Patients reported higher levels of satisfaction with social support and smaller network sizes compared with normative values. Using multiple linear regression, the independent correlates of psychological distress (p = 0.0001; adjusted R2 = 0.62) were as follows: active disease (p = 0.0234), less time since diagnosis (p = 0.0012), and greater number (p = 0.0001) and impact of stressful events (p = 0.0003). A statistically significant interaction term (p = 0.0171) revealed that the relationship between psychological distress and perceived stress changes depending on the level of satisfaction with social support. For patients with low levels of perceived stress, satisfaction with social support did not affect levels of psychological distress. However, for patients who experienced moderate to high levels of perceived stress, high satisfaction with social support decreased the level of psychological distress. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that strategies aimed at improving social support can have a favorable impact on psychological distress and, ultimately, can improve health outcomes in patients with IBD.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".