The Impact of Family and Peer Supports in Reducing Depression among Osteoarthritis Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Previous studies found that anxiety or depression were highly prevalent among osteoarthritis (OA) patients. This study aimed to examine the impact of family and peer support in reducing depression among OA patients. Subjects and Method: A case-control study was conducted at Dr. Moewardi Hospital and Dr. Soeharso Orthopedic Hospital, Surakarta, Central Java, from January to February 2018. A sample of 200 OA patients was selected by simple random sampling. The dependent variables were depression. The independent variables were pain level, functional disability, family support, and peer support. Data on depression were measured by Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI). Functional disability data were measured by The Western Ontario and McMaster University Arthritis Index (WOMAC). The other variables were collected by questionnaire. The data were analyzed by path analysis, run on Stata 13. Results: Family support (b= -0.75; 95% CI= -1.39 to -0.11; p= 0.022) and peer support (b= -1.25; 95% CI= -1.90 to -0.59; p<0.001) reduced depression in OA patients. Pain level was indirectly and positively associated with depression (b= 1.54; 95% CI= 0.88 to 2.20; p<0.001) through functional disability. Conclusion: Family support and peer support reduce depression in OA patients.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 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".