MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Association between perceived social support and strain, and positive and negative outcome for adults with mild intellectual disability

2001· article· en· W2008449311 on OpenAlexaff
Yona Lunsky, B. A. Benson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intellectual Disability Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsSurrey Place CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersOhio State University
KeywordsAssociation (psychology)Intellectual disabilityPsychologySocial supportClinical psychologyOutcome (game theory)PsychiatryDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social strain has been identified as a trigger for both depression and physical health problems, but has not been well researched in people with intellectual disability (ID). The present study contrasted the effects of social support with social strain on depressive symptoms, somatic complaints and quality of life over time in adults with mild ID. The level of social support explained a significant proportion of variance in quality of life 6 months later, but not depressive symptoms or somatic complaints. In contrast, the level of social strain accounted for a significant proportion of variance in depressive symptoms and somatic complaints 6 months later, but not quality of life. The results suggest that interpersonal relationships can be both positively and negatively associated with physical and mental health for people with ID.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.332 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations132
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intellectual Disability ResearchSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207