Psychological Distress In Canadian Men And Women With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Exploring The Differential Role Of Social Support
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Individuals with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) experience significant levels of psychological distress which is often moderated by social support. PTSD prevalence and symptomology gender differences tend to exist, and this may have important implications for the potential differential impact of social support. Objectives: The primary objectives of this study were to explore levels of psychological distress and social support in a sample of 364 Canadian adults reporting a PTSD diagnosis by a health professional, and to examine the link between specific social support types and psychological distress overall, and for males and females separately. Methods: Using a cross-sectional, national data file, 117 male and 247 female Canadian adults aged 20-64 reporting PTSD were profiled using the Social Provisions Scale – Short Form (SPS-SF), and the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), and compared to a sex, age and frequency matched control group without a PTSD diagnosis. Social support subtype scores were subsequently regressed onto psychological distress.Results: The PTSD sample had psychological distress scores that were more than double that of the matched control group, and were significantly lower in overall social support, and on each subscale. A diagnosis of PTSD was found to moderate the effect of social support on psychological distress, and while higher social integration and income predicted lower distress overall, higher reliable alliance scores, personal income, and lower age predicted lower distress for men, and higher social integration but lower guidance scores predicted lower distress for women.Conclusions: Social support subtypes were differentially associated with psychological distress experienced by those with PTSD depending on gender, and this may have important implications for clinical practice.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".