MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6920271165 · doi:10.60692/hs9kj-zmc38

DSM-5 posttraumatic stress symptom dimensions and health-related quality of life among Chinese earthquake survivors

2023· article· en· W6920271165 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)PsychosocialPosttraumatic stressArousalChecklistStructural equation modelingDepression (economics)Anxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been well-documented that posttraumatic stress symptoms cause impairments in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Until now we have little data on how DSM-5 PTSD symptom dimensions relate to different aspects of HRQoL. Clarifying this question would be informative to improve the quality of life of PTSD patients. This study aimed to investigate the effects of dimensions of a well-supported seven-factor model of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms on physical and psychosocial HRQoL. A total of 1063 adult survivors of the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake took part in this study nine years after the disaster. PTSD symptoms were measured by the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). HRQoL was measured by the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36). The associations between PTSD symptom dimensions and HRQoL were examined using structural equation models. Dysphoric arousal symptoms were found to significantly relate to physical HRQoL. Other symptom dimensions were not associated with HRQoL. Our findings contribute to the relationship between DSM-5 PTSD and HRQoL, and carry implications for further clinical practice and research on trauma-exposed individuals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.125
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207