The role of parenting stress in anxiety and sleep outcomes in toddlers with congenital heart disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: This retrospective cohort study investigates how parenting stress, measured at 4 months of age by use of a classic three-dimensional parent-reported scale (Parenting Stress Index, 4th Ed. or PSI-4), can predict anxiety symptoms and quality of sleep at 24 months in toddlers with congenital heart disease (CHD). Study Design: Sixty-six toddlers with CHD followed at our cardiac neurodevelopmental follow-up clinic were included in this study. As part of their systematic developmental assessment program, parents completed questionnaires on their stress level (PSI-4) when their child was 4 months old, and on their child's anxiety symptoms and quality of sleep at 24 months. Eight multiple linear regression models were built on the two measures collected at 24 months using the PSI-4 scores collected at 4 months. For each measure, four models were built from the PSI-4 total score and its three subscales (Parental Distress, Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction, Difficult Child), controlling for sex and socioeconomic status. Results: The PSI-4 Difficult Child subscale, which focuses on parenting anxiety related to the child's behavioral problems and poor psychosocial adjustment, accounted for 17% of the child's anxiety symptoms at 24 months. The two other PSI-4 subscales (Parental Distress and Parent-Child Dysfunctional Interaction) and the PSI-4 total score did not contribute significantly to the models. None of the four regression models on perceived quality of sleep were significant. It is important to note that 33% of parents responded defensively to the PSI-4. Conclusions: Parenting stress related to the child's behavioral problems and poor psychosocial adjustment, measured when the child is 4 months old, is associated with the child's ulterior anxiety symptoms. As very few standardized tools are available to assess the behavioral and psychoaffective development of infants, this study highlights the importance of early psychosocial screening in parents of infants with CHD. The high rate of significant Defensive Responding Indices reminds us to not take parent reports at face value, as their actual stress levels might be higher.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".