Predictors of quality of life and adjustment to chronic fatigue syndrome.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present research examined factors that contributed to the psychosocial adjustment and quality of life of individuals with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS). Variables studied included coping strategies, health locus of control, social support, quality of life, and psychosocial adjustment to illness. Forty CFS patients volunteered to participate in this study. Coping strategies were conceptualized in accordance with Lazarus and Folkman's (1984) stress and coping paradigm and were assessed using the Ways of Coping Questionnaire (Folkman & Lazarus, 1988). Social support was conceptualized as a multidimensional construct involving social interaction, instrumental support, and positive and negative subjective support. Social support was assessed using both the Duke Social Support Index (Koenig et al., 1993) and the Social Support in Illness Scale (Ray, 1992). Health locus of control was assessed using the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale-Form C (Wallston et al, 1994). Psychosocial adjustment was assessed using the Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale-Self Report (Derogatis, 1978). Quality of life was conceptualised as a subjective construct involving several dimensions and was assessed using the Quality of Life Scale designed by Flannigan (1978). Correlational and multiple regression analyses were conducted with coping strategies, social support, and health locus of control as predictors of measured adjustment to illness, and quality of life. Results indicated that in general, emotion-focussed coping and negative social support were negative predictors of quality of life and psychosocial adjustment to CFS. Problem-focused coping, an internal health locus of control and social support were positive predictors of quality of life and psychosocial adjustment. CFS patients face numerous difficulties in dealing with their illness, requiring flexibility in their use of coping strategies and strong emotional support from the people in their lives. As with other chronic illnesses, patients must learn what aspects of their disease can be personally controlled while maintaining some belief in the influence of luck or fate to avoid feelings of guilt and hopelessness in the face of uncontrollable symptoms.Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2000 .C63. Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 62-10, Section: B, page: 4776. Adviser: Kathryn Lafieniere. Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2000.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".