FAMILY FUNCTIONING AND DYADIC RELATIONSHIP IN MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS: PRELIMINARY DATA OF AN ITALIAN MULTICENTER STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic inflammatory and neurodegenerative disease which not only affects physical functioning but is also associated with cognitive impairments and psychological distress.The combination of these symptoms can have a negative consequence on the family functioning (FF) of people living with MS (PwMS), with detrimental effects on couples and their dyadic relationships.In addition, the quality of relationships could be influenced by other factors, such as specific individual characteristics (such as high levels of alexithymia) or social support.For these reasons, we assessed the FF and the quality of dyadic relationships of PwMS and their partners.Specifically, we aimed to investigate the relationships between alexithymia, psychological distress (anxiety and depressive symptoms), perceived social support, dyadic relationships and FF.Methods: Couples, consisting of PwMS and their respective partners, recruited from several Italian MS centers, were invited to complete an online survey.Measures included: the Brief Family Assessment Measure 3 (FAM3) to assess FF; the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for psychological distress symptoms; the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) for social support; the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) for alexithymia; the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS) for the quality of dyadic relationships. Results:In the present study, we analyzed data from 28 couples including 16 women and 12 men with MS and their partners (mean age: 46 years).A statistically significant correlation was found between the DAS scores (r=.496, p<.007), while no correlation was found between the FAM3 scores of the PwMS and the partner.The FAM3 scores of the PwMS were significantly correlated with the DAS (r=-.643,p<.01), MSPSS (r=-.624,p<.01) and TAS-20 scores (r=.424, p<.025) as well as with the HADS-Depression scores (r=.493, p<.008) and MPSS scores (r=-.447,p<.017) of the partners.The partner's FAM3 scores was significantly correlated with his/her level of anxiety (HADS-Anxiety r=.558, p<.002) and depression scores (HADS-Depression r=.844, p<.01), with the TAS-20 (r=.466, p<.012), the MSPSS (r=-.562,p<.002) and the DAS scores (r=-.451,p<.016).Discussion: Overall, data show that couples do not rate the quality of the FF equally but agree on the quality of the dyadic relationship.Interestingly, partners' psychological distress influenced both patients' and partners' perceptions of FF, suggesting that special attention should be paid to this aspect in clinical practice, as it could be a crucial factor for both partners.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".