Positive orientation in the context of ways of coping with stress and social support in patients with multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess in detail the relationship between positive orientation and coping strategies adopted to deal with stress, and perceived social support among patients with multiple sclerosis.Material and methods: Sixty patients of the Multiple Sclerosis Outpatient Clinic operating at the L. Rydygier Specialist Hospital in Kraków participated in the study.The project was questionnaire-based.The following tools were used: the Mini-COPE Stress Coping Inventory, the SWS Social Support Scale, and the Positive Orientation Scale (P Scale).Results: The correlation between scores on the Positive Orientation Scale and the Social Support Scale and its subscales was statistically significant, but negative.A positive correlation was found between patients' scores on the Positive Orientation Scale and the use of pro-developmental coping strategies.A statistically significant negative correlation between positive orientation and destructive coping strategies was found.The expected statistically significant differences in perceived social support between the in-and out-of-relationship groups and between men and women were not detected.Conclusions: This study extends previous knowledge regarding the detailed relationships between positive orientation and adopted coping strategies, coping with a diagnosis of neurodegenerative disease and perceived social support.The study specifically captures the complex relationship between the variables studied and the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis.To date, this issue has been addressed only by analysing the impact of individual variables separately.The paper simultaneously combines and compares various factors supporting health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".