Subjective well-being of adults with multiple sclerosis during COVID-19: Evaluating stress–appraisal–coping and person–environment factors.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People with multiple sclerosis (MS) have been coping with high levels of stress during the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, affecting their employment, physical, and mental health, and overall life satisfaction. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated constructs of the stress-appraisal-coping theory and positive person-environment factors as predictors of subjective well-being for adults with MS. METHOD: Participants included 477 adults with MS recruited through the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. Hierarchical regression analysis was used to determine the incremental variance in subjective well-being accounted for by demographic covariates, functional disability, perceived stress, stress appraisal, coping styles, and positive person-environment contextual factors. RESULTS: ² = 1.48; large effect size). CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study support a stress management and well-being model based on constructs of Lazarus and Folkman's stress-appraisal-coping theory and positive person-environment contextual factors, which can inform the development of theory-driven and empirically supported stress management and well-being interventions for people with MS during the ongoing global health crisis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".