MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295908343 · doi:10.1037/rep0000468

What factors are associated with resilience in persons with multiple sclerosis? The role of personality traits.

2022· article· en· W4295908343 on OpenAlexaff
Elizabeth S. Gromisch, Aaron P. Turner, Aprille Gangi, Lindsay O. Neto, Frederick W. Foley

Bibliographic record

VenueRehabilitation Psychology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscientiousnessBig Five personality traitsClinical psychologyAgreeablenessNeuroticismPsychologyPersonalityPsychological resilienceSelf-efficacyPsycINFOExtraversion and introversionPsychosocialPsychiatrySocial psychologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: While personality traits have been well-documented to be related to resilience in several populations, they have yet to be explored in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). As such, this study aimed to understand how personality traits are associated with MS-related resilience after considering the independent contributions of self-efficacy, a significant component of the biopsychosocial model of resilience in MS, and demographic and disease characteristics. RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: = 112) were PwMS who completed a 1-time cross-sectional study. Resilience was measured using the MS Resiliency Scale, while personality traits and self-efficacy were assessed using the NEO-Five Factor Inventory-3 and University of Washington Self-Efficacy Scale, respectively. An ordinary least squares linear regression was run to examine the relationship between resilience, personality traits, self-efficacy, and demographic and disease characteristics. RESULTS: = .044) were significantly related to resilience. While extraversion, conscientiousness, and agreeableness were associated with resilience on a bivariate level, they were not significant in the multivariate model. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: This study highlights how neuroticism, along with self-efficacy and marital status, plays a role in MS-related resilience. While further research is needed, these findings may help inform future resilience-building interventions or identify individuals at greater risk for lower levels of resilience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRehabilitation PsychologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207