Parental attitudes and personality traits, self-efficacy, stress, and coping strategies among mothers of children with cerebral palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Development of children with cerebral palsy (CP) depends on the quality of parental care. The aim of the research was to compare parenting attitudes in mothers of children with CP to mothers of typically developing children, and to study the relationship between parenting attitudes and personality traits, stress, coping strategies and self-efficacy in mothers of children with CP. Participants and procedure Twenty-seven mothers of children with cerebral palsy (MCCP) (mean age 35.50 years, SD = 4.83) and twenty-eight mothers (mean age 35.60 years, SD = 4.27) of typically developing children (MTDC) participated in this study. Each parent had a child between the ages of two and seven years. A battery of tests was administered to both groups, which included the Parenting Attitudes Scale (SPR), the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), and the COPE Inventory. Also, maternal stress and the amount of social support received were assessed. Results Although acceptance was the most common parental attitude among all participants, mothers of children with CP presented with a stronger tendency towards overprotective and demanding attitudes. MCCP obtained higher scores in neuroticism and lower in openness compared to MTDC. Furthermore, MCCP declared a higher level of distress than MTDC. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups of mothers regarding self-efficacy, the level of social support or the most often used coping strategies. Neuroticism was found to be the best predictor of overprotective and demanding parental attitudes. Conclusions The study emphasises the importance of parenting programmes for mothers with children with CP to promote the development of autonomy among children with developmental 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".