A longitudinal study of the profiles of psychological thriving, resilience, and loss in people with inflammatory bowel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Despite the toll of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) on adjustment, many patients are resilient to the challenges associated with living with IBD, and successfully cope with their illness and thrive. Yet there is little research on why some individuals with IBD enter a trajectory of growth, while others may struggle to adapt. The aim of this study was to investigate the adjustment-related factors that distinguished thriving, resilience, and loss in people with IBD across personal growth, life satisfaction, and relationship quality domains. DESIGN: Prospective cohort design with two data collection points, 6 months apart. METHODS: From a sample of 420 people with active IBD who completed an online survey, 152 participants completed the follow-up survey and were included in the analyses. Participants completed measures of thriving, and cognitive, affective, social, and disease-related variables known to predict adjustment. RESULTS: Time 1 ANCOVAs and pairwise comparisons controlling for demographics distinguished loss from resilience and thriving on the four outcomes - coping efficacy, illness acceptance, depressive symptoms, and perceived social support - for all three domains. Time 2 ANCOVAs and pairwise comparisons controlling for baseline outcomes revealed that the Time thriving categories predicted differences in Time 2 adjustment, mainly for the life satisfaction domain, with those experiencing loss reporting poorer adjustment than those experiencing resilience and thriving. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the distinctions among profiles of thriving, resilience, and loss in adjustment to IBD, and suggest that strategies that enhance coping and address depressive symptoms may optimize thriving in the context of IBD. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is associated with depression, poor coping, and stressful symptoms. Previous research has focused mainly on poor adjustment to IBD rather than on positive growth. There is little research on why some patients with IBD thrive or are resilient, while others struggle to adapt. What does this study add? This study is the first to longitudinally examine the profiles of thriving, resilience, and loss in individuals with IBD. The thriving profiles differed in coping efficacy, illness acceptance, depressive symptoms, and social support outcomes at Time 1, and predicted adjustment at T2 mainly for the life satisfaction domain. Strategies that enhance coping and social support may optimize thriving in the context of IBD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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; 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".