Psychological and physiological differences related to supportive living situations amongst individuals with physical disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The caregiver-patient dynamic is a complex relationship. While caregivers' potential psychological and physical burdens have received much attention, few studies have focused on the patient's perspective. This study investigated how the presence of a caregiver affects perceived stress, mental health and metabolic function in individuals with physical disabilities (PDis). The study included individuals with a PDis living with a full-time caregiver and those with a PDis living alone. The severity of perceived stress, the state of mental health, and the amount of social support were assessed using standardized questionnaires. Urine samples were collected and analyzed using a proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy-based metabolomics approach to investigate if different living situations affect biochemical pathways. Although there were no statistically significant differences in stress outcomes or mental health between the two groups, metabolomic analysis revealed a significant impact of the living situation on metabolic pathways, including histidine metabolism and alanine, aspartate and glutamate metabolism. Aspartic acid levels positively correlated with perceived stress and depressive symptoms in the Caregiver Group, while inosine positively correlated with stress in the Alone Group. This study highlights the unique psychological and metabolic profiles associated with a PDis based on living arrangements.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".