MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7115616340

Resilience Factors and Their Association with Anxiety and Depressive Symptoms: An Intergenerational Perspective

2025· article· en· W7115616340 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychopathologyPsychological resilienceAnxietyAssociation (psychology)Perspective (graphical)Mental healthChild psychopathologyOutpatient clinicChild and adolescent psychiatry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adi Drapisz,1 Ron Walfisch,1 Tal Shilton,1 Nimrod Hertz-Palmor,2 Idit Dekel,1 Mariela Mosheva,1 Doron Gothelf,1 Ran Barzilay3– 5 1The Division of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, the Edmond and Lily Safra Children’s Hospital, Sheba, Ramat Gan, Israel; 2MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; 3Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 4Lifespan Brain Institute of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 5Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USACorrespondence: Ran Barzilay, Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 34th and Spruce Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA, Tel +1(484)6957937, Email Barzilayr@chop.eduBackground: Characterizing variability in youth mental health trajectories from risk to resilience is crucial for elucidating the heterogeneity present within clinical populations. Limited knowledge exists regarding the intergenerational associations of resilience factors. The present study aimed to examine the associations between resilience factors and psychopathology in youth referred for outpatient psychiatric evaluation and their parents.Methods: Dyads of children and their parents (N=99; 99 children and 99 parents) treated in a child and adolescent psychiatry outpatient clinic completed assessments for resilience factors and internalizing psychopathology. Internalizing symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale (GAD-7); resilience factors were measured using the Risk and Resilience (R&R) battery, focusing on self-reliance and emotion regulation.Results: Youth’s emotion regulation and self-reliance demonstrated inverse associations with their anxiety and depressive composite score, derived by averaging standardized PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores to represent internalizing symptoms (β=− 0.5, p < 0.0001; β=− 0.27, p = 0.001 respectively). Parental emotion regulation was inversely associated with parental anxiety and depressive symptoms (β=− 0.70, p < 0.0001), but parental self-reliance was not (β=0.04, p=0.67). No intergenerational correlation was identified between parent-child anxiety and depressive symptoms (P-values> 0.38) nor between resilience factors (P-values> 0.47). Lastly, multivariate analyses revealed no association for parental anxiety and depressive symptoms or resilience factors with child symptoms.Conclusion: These findings contribute to the growing body of evidence on the relationship between the resilience factors of emotional regulation and self-reliance and anxiety-depression symptoms in youth. However, no intergenerational associations were observed between of resilience factors and internalizing psychopathology in both parents and youth.Keywords: transgenerational resilience, self-reliance, emotion-regulation, depression, anxiety

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.453 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicResilience and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→