Religious Coping as Mediator between Illness Perception and Health-Related Quality of Life among Chronic Kidney Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) a raising global pandemic known to cause psychological dysfunction but not well studied. The purpose of this study was to measure the influence of illness perception and religious coping strategies on patients’ health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and to identify direct or indirect predictors of religious coping on illness perception and HRQoL of ESRD patients. This study involved 274 patients with ESRD who were on chronic maintenance dialysis. Test instruments used included Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R) to measure patients’ perception towards the illness, Religious Coping Strategies questionnaire (RCS) to determine patients' nature of religious coping and Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire to measure their HRQoL. Results showed that almost all components of illness perception and religious coping strategies were significantly correlated with HRQoL in both aspects of physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). In addition, the findings showed religious coping as a mediator between several illness perception components namely timeline, illness coherence, personal control, consequences and cyclical with PCS and MCS. Attention should be given especially to illness perception and positive religious coping variables in any intervention program to improve the HRQoL of ESRD 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".