Understanding Perceived Stress in Adolescent Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is a chronic and debilitating illness associated with psychosocial comorbidities. Adolescents are vulnerable to the additive stress of managing IBD and navigating developmental milestones. Psychosocial factors, such as catastrophizing, illness stigma, illness uncertainty, and illness-related shame, often contribute to perceived stress in chronic illnesses. However, the combination of these variables on perceived stress in adolescents with IBD has not been examined. Methods Participants completed a cross-sectional online self-report survey. Model 4 of PROCESS Macro in SPSS was used to test the parallel mediation model of the relationship between disease severity and perceived stress using catastrophizing, stigma, uncertainty, and shame as mediators using 10,000 bootstrap samples. T-tests were run to assess systematic differences in the dependent variable between subjects. Results One hundred and thirty-one adolescents (Mage = 18.95 years; 100 females) completed the survey. Females had higher stress scores than males (P =0.002), and there were no difference in stress between younger and older participants (P = 0.085), location (P = 0.484), or IBD type (P = 0.515). The total effect of disease stress on perceived stress operating through the mediators was significant, b = 0.168, SE = 0.028, 95% CI [0.112, 0.224]. Helplessness catastrophizing, illness uncertainty, and illness-related shame, but not illness stigma, were equally strong, positive mediators. Conclusions The present results suggest that helplessness catastrophizing, illness uncertainty, and illness-related shame are central elements to target in stress interventions for adolescents with IBD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".