Adaptation process, participation and depression over six months in first-stroke individuals and spouses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe changes in the adaptation process (appraisal and coping) in the six months after a first stroke and identify domains of the adaptation process related to participation and depressive symptoms for both affected individuals and spouses. DESIGN: A short-longitudinal study where data of the two groups were collected at three times: in the first two weeks post stroke (T1), at three months (T2) and six months (T3) post stroke. SUBJECTS: Individuals with a first stroke and spouses. MAIN MEASURES: The Stress Appraisal Measure (SAM) for appraisal, Revised Ways of Coping Questionnaire (RWCQ) for coping strategies, Assessment of Life Habits (LIFE-H) for participation, and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) for depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Mean (SD) ages of the stroke group (n = 88) and spouse group (n = 47) were 71.8 (10.8) and 69.2 (11.2) years respectively. The Threat, Challenge and Stressfulness scales of the SAM decreased significantly (P < 0.02) from T1 to T3 in both groups whereas perceived uncontrollability of the situation increased significantly (P = 0.003) for spouses in the first six months. RWCQ Rationalisation and Giving control to others scales decreased in the stroke group (P = 0.008 and 0.002 respectively) but not in the spouse group (P = 0.07 and 0.39 respectively). Several components of adaptation at T1 could explain between 18% and 27% of the variance observed in the LIFE-H and BDI at T3. CONCLUSION: Appraisal and coping strategies change over time. Initial adaptation could partially predict participation level and depressive symptoms six months post stroke for affected individuals as well as spouses.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".