Psychological adjustment and marital satisfaction following head injury. Which critical personal characteristics should both partners develop?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: PRIMARY OBJECTIVE AND RESEARCH DESIGN: Using a correlational design, this study verifies the relationships between personal characteristics of individuals with TBI and their spouses and their level of psychological and marital adjustment. METHODS AND PROCEDURE: Seventy individuals with TBI and their spouses in the post-acute rehabilitation phase completed self-report questionnaires assessing the predictive variables (coping and social problem-solving strategies; perceived communication skills) and the criteria variables of psychological and marital adjustment. MAIN OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: In the target group, the characteristics most strongly related to adjustment variables were an effective attitude towards problems, infrequent use of avoidance coping strategies, and a positive perception of one's spouse's communication skills. Individuals with TBI and their spouses report significantly lower scores on some of these personal characteristics, compared to those of a matched control group of 70 couples from the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Specific personal characteristics are critical for psychological and marital adjustment following TBI. This knowledge may be of relevance for detecting couples at risk for developing difficulties in the post-acute rehabilitation phase. Rehabilitation interventions targeting the personal characteristics identified as critical for the adjustment process could help to prevent these difficulties.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".