Psychological and Relationship Distress Among Partners of Civilian PTSD Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant others of individuals with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may experience both intrapersonal and interpersonal distress as caregivers. The aim of the present study is 3-fold: (1) to examine symptoms of psychological and relationship distress (anxiety, depression, and dyadic adjustment) among partners of civilian patients with PTSD, (2) to investigate the links between partners' distress and PTSD patients' symptoms (severity; intrusion, avoidance, and arousal subscales), and (3) to explore the perception of mental and physical health, types of trauma and compare partners and PTSD patients' measures. Fifty-seven PTSD patients and their partners filled out 4 questionnaires: Marital Adjustment Test, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and Medical Outcome Survey-Short Form-12. Results showed that only a minority of partners presented clinical levels of depression (16.7%), anxiety (14.8%), and relationship distress (37%). Pearson correlations analyses revealed an absence of statistically significant relationship between partners' distress and PTSD patients' symptoms. In conclusion, although our study is not a direct validation of the secondary traumatic stress model, our findings fail to provide strong support to the secondary traumatic stress hypothesis among partners of civilian PTSD 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".