Self-efficacy as a predictor of patient-reported outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Self-efficacy is a known predictor of patient-reported outcomes in individuals with acquired diseases. With an overall objective of better understanding patient-reported outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease, this study aimed to: (i) assess self-efficacy in adults with congenital heart disease, (ii) explore potential demographic and medical correlates of self-efficacy and (iii) determine whether self-efficacy explains additional variance in patient-reported outcomes above and beyond known predictors. METHODS: As part of a large cross-sectional international multi-site study (APPROACH-IS), we enrolled 454 adults (median age 32 years, range: 18-81) with congenital heart disease in two tertiary care centres in Canada and Switzerland. Self-efficacy was measured using the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) scale, which produces a total score ranging from 10 to 40. Variance in the following patient-reported outcomes was assessed: perceived health status, psychological functioning, health behaviours and quality of life. Hierarchical multivariable linear regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Patients' mean GSE score was 30.1 ± 3.3 (range: 10-40). Lower GSE was associated with female sex ( p = 0.025), not having a job ( p = 0.001) and poorer functional class ( p = 0.048). GSE positively predicted health status and quality of life, and negatively predicted symptoms of anxiety and depression, with an additional explained variance up to 13.6%. No associations between self-efficacy and health behaviours were found. CONCLUSIONS: GSE adds considerably to our understanding of patient-reported outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease. Given that self-efficacy is a modifiable psychosocial factor, it may be an important focus for interventions targeting congenital heart disease patients' well-being.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".