MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042133065 · doi:10.1007/bf02237197

Coping behavior and social support contribute independently to quality of life after surgery for inflammatory bowel disease

2000· article· en· W2042133065 on OpenAlexaff
David N. Moskovitz, Robert Maunder, Zane Cohen, Robin S. McLeod, Helen MacRae

Bibliographic record

VenueDiseases of the Colon & Rectum · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicInflammatory Bowel Disease
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoping (psychology)Social supportInflammatory bowel diseaseDiseaseClinical psychologyQuality of life (healthcare)Avoidance copingCohortInternal medicinePsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the association between coping behavior at the time of surgery and inflammatory bowel disease-related quality of life after surgery. We also investigated the relationship between perceived social support and both coping style and postsurgical quality of life. Finally, the value of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Scale for preoperative screening was assessed. METHODS: Eighty-six subjects who had surgery during a 12-month period completed the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire, the Ways of Coping, a measure of inflammatory bowel disease symptom severity, and the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Scale. Analysis of variance was used to test an association between Ways of Coping score and membership in a high quality of life (Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire > mean) or low quality of life (Inflammatory Bowel Disease Questionnaire < mean) cohort. Comparison of group means between the high quality of life and low quality of life cohorts identified Ways of Coping behavior scales that differed between the high quality of life and low quality of life cohorts. Stepwise linear regression analysis was then used to determine the independent contribution of 1) current inflammatory bowel disease symptoms, 2) current perceived social support, and 3) identified coping behaviors (self-control, self-blame, and escape, summed as a single index named "maladaptive coping") to postsurgical quality of life. The sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Scale were assessed. RESULTS: The lower quality of life group distinguished itself by more frequent use of maladaptive coping. Regression analysis revealed that current inflammatory bowel disease-related symptoms, current perceived social support, and maladaptive coping behaviors at the time of surgery each made a highly significant independent contribution to postsurgical quality of life. The sensitivity of the Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Scale in identifying patients with poor postsurgical quality of life was 81 percent, and the specificity was 77 percent. The negative predictive value was 93 percent. CONCLUSIONS: Three coping behaviors which seem to be maladaptive (self-control, self-blame, and escape) are associated with lower quality of life after surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. These coping behaviors make a contribution to postsurgical quality of life independent of the negative effect on quality of life of inflammatory bowel disease symptoms. Perceived social support is a third factor that makes an independent contribution to postsurgical quality of life. The Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Scale has properties associated with an effective screening tool and merits further investigation as an instrument to screen presurgically for individuals at higher risk of poor subjective outcome of inflammatory bowel disease surgery.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations68
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiseases of the Colon & RectumSame topicInflammatory Bowel DiseaseFrench-language works237,207