Family functioning impairment in pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder and psychiatric outpatient controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) imposes significant family functioning impairment (FFI) on household routines, socio-occupational activities, and caregiver emotional well-being. Low parental tolerance of one's child's distress (PTCD) predisposes to accommodation behaviors associated with poorer OCD outcomes. Knowledge is limited regarding whether family dysfunction is related to the burden of having a child with any mental illness, or whether it differs by psychiatric condition. Methods Our study compares FFI and PTCD outcomes between pediatric OCD and non-OCD disorders, and explores clinical correlates. Data were collected at tertiary outpatient child and adolescent psychiatry programs for OCD ( n = 287) and five other specialty clinics ( n = 1110). FFI and PTCD were measured by the Family Functioning Impairment Scale and Parental Tolerance of Child's Distress Scale, respectively. Results Multivariable linear regression modelling indicated greater FFI for youth with OCD in comparison to psychiatric controls (FFI difference = 3.5, p = .018), particularly regarding family routine disturbances (FFI difference = 2.4, p = .005). FFI was associated with traumatic incident history (FFI difference = 2.8, p = .012), financial struggles (FFI difference = 3.2, p = .002) and first-degree family history of developmental/psychiatric disorders (FFI difference = 4.6, p < .001). Results highlight the significant impacts of OCD on family functioning, with greater illness severity and household routine disruptions secondary to family symptom involvement as potential contributors. It also underscores the importance of family-inclusive OCD treatment strategies and tailored interdisciplinary supports to enhance family functioning.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".