Post-traumatic stress disorder and cognitive functioning of female burn survivors by cause, severity and health complaints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the relationship between burn cause, severity and health complaints with post-traumatic stress and cognitive functioning of female burn survivors. Methodology: In this cross sectional observational study, data were collected at Department of Psychology, University of Gujrat from November 15 to July 25 2018. Among the post burn female survivors, causes of burn injury, burn severity and health complications were assessed. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale was used to measure the constructs of Post-Traumatic Stress and cognitive functioning of domains of attention, abstraction, naming and memory. Results: Among 200 post burn victims, the model fit summary confirmed (p=0.003) the structural relationship of causes of burn injury with post-traumatic stress and post-traumatic stress relationship with the cognitive functioning and burn severity association with the cognitive function of attention and memory. The causative agent (p=0.750) and health complaints (p=0.605) had non-significant relation with post-traumatic stress while post-traumatic stress had non-significant relationship with attention (p=0.190) and memory (p=0.112). Conclusion: Burn cause, burn severity and health complaints were the leading factors of post-traumatic stress disorder in female burn survivors. Further, the post-traumatic stress induced cognitive impairment was present in them.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".