MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207373067 · doi:10.1111/hex.13374

Towards conceptual convergence: A systematic review of psychological resilience in family caregivers of persons living with chronic neurological conditions

2021· review· en· W3207373067 on OpenAlexafffund
Odessa McKenna, Afolasade Fakolade, Katherine Cardwell, Nigèle Langlois, Karen Jiang, Lara A. Pilutti

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Expectations · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsPsychological interventionPsychologyCoping (psychology)Psychological resilienceSocial supportDistressQuality of life (healthcare)PopulationClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyMedicineSocial psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The demand for family caregiving in persons with chronic neurological conditions (CNCs) is increasing. Psychological resilience may empower and protect caregivers in their role. Thus, a synthesis of resilience evidence within this specific population is warranted. AIM: In this systematic review we aimed to: (1) examine the origins and conceptualizations of resilience; (2) summarize current resilience measurement tools; and (3) synthesize correlates, predictors and outcomes of resilience in family caregivers of persons with CNCs. DESIGN: We sourced English articles published up to July 2020 across five databases using search terms involving CNCs, family caregivers and resilience. RESULTS: A total of 50 studies were retained. Nearly half (44%) of the studies used trait-based resilience definitions, while about one third (36%) used process-based definitions. Twelve different resilience scales were used, revealing mostly moderate to high-resilience levels. Findings confirmed that resilience is related to multiple indicators of healthy functioning (e.g., quality of life, social support, positive coping), as it buffers against negative outcomes of burden and distress. Discordance relating to the interaction between resilience and demographic, sociocultural and environmental factors was apparent. CONCLUSIONS: Incongruity remains with respect to how resilience is defined and assessed, despite consistent definitional concepts of healthy adaptation and equilibrium. The array of implications of resilience for well-being confirms the potential for resilience to be leveraged within caregiver health promotion initiatives via policy and practice. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The findings may inform future recommendations for researchers and practitioners to develop high-quality resilience-building interventions and programmes to better mobilize and support this vulnerable group.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.123
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.123
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0220.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth ExpectationsSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207