Factors Associated with Distress in Caregivers of People with Personality Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study investigated how stressors experienced by caregivers of people with personality disorders relate to each other and psychological distress, using the Stress Process Model (Pearlin et al. in Gerontologist 30(5):583-594, https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/30.5.583 , 1990). A community sample of caregivers (N = 106) completed an online survey. Partial Least Squares Path Modelling revealed that caregivers who were male, younger, or residing with their loved one were more likely to experience stressors. Salient primary stressors included the caregivers' worry and care-receivers' levels of instrumental demands and interpersonal problems. Important secondary stressors included strains in the caregivers' schedules, family relationships, and health, as well as reduced mastery and caregiving esteem. The model provided preliminary support for a pathway from demographic and relationship characteristics, through primary and secondary stressors, to heightened psychological distress. The present study clarifies the way caregiving stressors give rise to psychological distress; directions for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".