Trait Perfectionism and Psychosocial Outcomes in Adolescents With Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective cross-sectional study was to examine perfectionism, disease self-management, and psychosocial outcomes in a sample of adolescents with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: Adolescent patients with IBD and caregivers were enrolled in the study. Patients completed the Child and Adolescent Perfectionism Scale, the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ), and the TRANSITION-Q. Parents completed the Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale and the parent form of the SDQ. Health care providers reported on disease activity using the Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (PUCAI) and the Pediatric Crohn Disease Activity Index (PCDAI). RESULTS: Ninety adolescents (mean age 15.17 ± 1.49, range = 12-18) with diagnosed IBD (51 CD, 37 UC, and 2 IBD-U) and 76 primary caregivers participated in the study. Results indicated high rates of self-oriented perfectionism in adolescents with IBD (59% of sample reported elevated rates; 33% of sample in the clinical range). After accounting for age, sex, and disease activity, self-oriented perfectionistic striving was associated with better disease self-management; nonetheless, adolescent and parent perfectionistic strivings were also related to higher adolescent internalizing symptoms (standardized beta = 0.22 and 0.29, respectively). Additionally, perfectionistic concerns (self-critical and socially prescribed perfectionism) were associated with higher rates of adolescent-reported externalizing symptoms (standardized beta 0.30 and 0.24). Further, multilevel mixed modelling found no differences within-dyad in relation to perfectionism, but documented that adolescents report higher levels of externalizing symptoms compared with parents. CONCLUSIONS: The present study explores the prevalence and presentation of perfectionism in a sample of adolescents with IBD. Results suggest dimensions of perfectionism are differentially associated with psychosocial and disease management outcomes, suggesting further evidence of the relationship between perfectionism, maladaptive coping, and subsequent influences on health outcomes in the context of pediatric chronic illness.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".