Social support and symptom severity among patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder or panic disorder with agoraphobia: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (PD/A) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are characterized by major behavioral dysruptions that may affect patients' social and marital functioning. The disorders' impact on interpersonal relationships may also affect the quality of support patients receive from their social network. The main goal of this systematic review is to determine the association between social or marital support and symptom severity among adults with PD/A or OCD. A systematic search of databases was executed and provided 35 eligible articles. Results from OCD studies indicated a negative association between marital adjustment and symptom severity, and a positive association between accommodation from relatives and symptom severity. However, results were inconclusive for negative forms of social support (e.g. criticism, hostility). Results from PD/A studies indicated a negative association between perceived social support and symptom severity. Also, results from studies using an observational measure of marital adjustment indicated a negative association between quality of support from the spouse and PD/A severity. However, results were inconclusive for perceived marital adjustment and symptom severity. In conclusion, this systematic review generally suggests a major role of social and marital support in PD/A and OCD symptomatology. However, given diversity of results and methods used in studies, more are needed to clarify the links between support and symptom severity among patients with PD/A and OCD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".