The effectiveness of a psycho-educational nursing intervention on illness perception, knowledge and expressed emotion of caregivers of patients with first episode psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Psycho educational nursing intervention to families of patients with first-episode psychosis is highly recommended to assist families to overcome feelings of stress, guilt, stigma, loss of control and to promote recovery of patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of psych educational nursing intervention on illness perception, level of knowledge and level of expressed emotion of caregivers of patients with first episode psychosis.Methods: Research design: a quasi-experimental research design (one group pre-posttest) was used to achieve the aim of the study. The study was conducted at three psychiatric and mental health governmental outpatient clinics. A convenience sample of 50 caregivers was used. Data was collected using socio demographic data questionnaire, family questionnaire, knowledge questionnaire, and illness perception questionnaire.Results: There were clinically significant improvement among the caregivers' level of knowledge and illness perception at post test of psycho educational nursing intervention than before intervention, while level of expressed emotion was improved post the psycho educational nursing intervention but without obvious significant difference.Conclusions & Recommendation: Psycho educational nursing intervention was effective in improving caregivers' level of knowledge, illness perception and expressed emotion. The study recommended to urgently utilize psycho educational nursing intervention to all caregivers of patient with first episode psychosis in all psychiatric hospitals.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".