Factors predicting parents' adaptation when supporting their young adult during a first‐episode psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim The objective is to identify the factors that predict how well parents will adapt when supporting their adult child experiencing a FEP. Methods The study was conducted in Quebec city with 58 parents and stepparents who received services from a specialized clinic for treating psychotic illnesses in the early stages. Participants filled in four measuring instruments during a standardized telephone interview. Based on the model being proposed, bivariate analyses and linear regression models were carried out to identify factors that predict how parents will adapt. Results The analyses allowed us to determine that the factors revealing the severity of the illness and the vulnerability of the young person predict the negative aspects of the parents' experience (R2 = 0.39, P ≤ 0.000), whereas the personal factors related to the parents themselves essentially predict the positive aspects (R2 = 0.51, P ≤ 0.001). The empowerment can be predicted by the combined effect of the positive aspects of the parents' experience and their coping strategies, more specifically those related to family intervention (R2 = 0.60, P ≤ 0.001), whereas the parents' social functioning is linked to their active participation in a family association (R2= 0.14, P ≤ 0.006). Conclusion This study contributes to how we think of parents' adaptation as it suggests a model that takes the positive aspects into account, associated with the role of support, along with family intervention strategies offered by social workers. Adaptation that is conceptualized using two dependent variables, empowerment and social functioning, allows to identify intervention targets that will be beacons of hope for both the parents and the young people with psychosis, while encouraging early intervention and partnership practices between services and family members.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".