Stress, Resilience, and Satisfaction in Families of Children with Disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A child’s disability can have significant consequences for the family, especially at an emotional level and in day-to-day life. Families must adapt to ever-changing circumstances, frequently leading to stress within the family. Each family member must attempt to cope with these circumstances, drawing on cognitive and behavioral resources to deal with new situations. Objectives: This work aims to study stress, resilience, and satisfaction within the families of children with and without disabilities. It also analyzed these aspects depending on the type of disability (intellectual, physical, autism spectrum disorder, and multiple disabilities). Methods: The sample consisted of 299 families, of whom 178 had a child with a disability and 121 without any disability. The study used the Parenting Stress Index – Short Form (PSI-FS) and the Saavedra-Villalta Resilience Scale (SV-RES). Satisfaction was measured using two items evaluating family satisfaction in general and the perceived satisfaction of the child in particular. Results: The results show that families having a child with a disability reported higher levels of resilience but lower levels of stress and family satisfaction. Moreover, differences were observed depending on the type of disability, with those affected by intellectual disability showing higher levels of stress and lower levels of resilience. Conclusion: The study results show the importance of resilience in dealing with adverse situations that may produce stress. This is an important aspect that must be considered in work and interventions with families of children with disabilities.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".