Contribution of Perceived Cognitive Functioning to Quality of Life in Service Members and Veterans With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perceived cognitive impairment is a core clinical feature of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and may be an important determinant of quality of life (QOL) in those who suffer from this disorder. Using a clinical data repository, we evaluated this hypothesis in a cross-sectional sample of U.S. military service members and veterans who served after September 11, 2001, and were seeking mental health treatment at a tertiary outpatient clinic. A consecutive series of 117 patients with a clinical diagnosis of PTSD completed a battery of questionnaires at intake, including the PTSD Checklist (Weathers, Litz, Herman, Huska, & Keane, 1993), a 4-item Cognitive Symptom subscale of the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (Cicerone & Kalmar, 1995), the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Endicott, Nee, Harrison, & Blumenthal, 1993). Cognitive symptom reporting was very high, even in the subgroup without a history of traumatic brain injury. In a regression analysis, cognitive symptom severity was independently associated with QOL (β = -.204). This relationship was not explained by comorbid traumatic brain injury, but was restricted to patients with comorbid depression (β = -.278 in the subgroup with an elevated Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 Depression subscale; n = 91). In conclusion, perceived cognitive impairment was common in this PTSD sample and helped to explain impairments in QOL, especially in patients with comorbid depression.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".