Psychopathology and coping behaviors among wives of patients with bipolar affective disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bipolar Affective Disorder (BPAD) is a challenging psychiatric illness which burdens both the patient as well as the caregiver. As a consequence, many psychiatric symptoms are reported in the spouses and caregivers of patients with BPAD. Caregivers adopt various coping behaviors to tackle their stress and overcome these situations. The objective is to study psychopathology and coping strategies among wives of inpatients with BPAD admitted under the psychiatry department of a tertiary care teaching institute. Methods: This cross-sectional observational study was done at the inpatient wards of the Department of Psychiatry of Jubilee Mission Medical College & Research Institute, Kerala. The sample size was 70 and the study duration was 18 months. After approval from the institutional ethics committee, the study was done. Psychopathology was assessed using Comprehensive Psychopathological Rating Scale (CPRS) and psychiatric morbidity using Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus (Mini-Plus). Coping behavior was assessed using Brief-COPE. Results: Most commonly reported psychopathology was reduced sleep (71.4%). Nearly three-fourth were having psychiatric morbidity, with a majority having adjustment disorder – brief depressive reaction. The most commonly used coping behaviors were approach coping/problem-focused coping rather than avoidant coping. Conclusion: From this study, it was found that the majority of the wives of patients with BPAD had depressive symptoms and most of them were diagnosed to have adjustment disorder. Therefore, while planning the management of patients with BPAD we have to ensure that adequate psychosocial support is being provided to their primary caregivers also.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".