ReviewDer Nervenarzt2018
[Who stays healthy? The problem of predicting resilience].
Review in Der Nervenarzt, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual Stress Burden and Mental Health in Health Care Workers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Moderating and Mediating Effects of Resilience.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Resilience in Adult Health Science Revisited-A Narrative Review Synthesis of Process-Oriented Approaches.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResilience is a complex construct commonly defined as a dynamic process of maintenance or rapid restoration of mental health during and following exposure to stress and trauma. Resilient individuals show no or only minimal disruption in their overall functioning following trauma. Predictors of individual resilience are currently unclear.
objectiveAre there significant and reliable predictors of resilience? MATERIAL AND
methodsAnalysis and summary of recent studies on psychosocial and neurobiological resilience predictors derived from longitudinal studies.
resultsLess than half of the studies on psychosocial and neurobiological predictors reviewed indexed predictors for resilience prior to exposure to the traumatic event. The results are heterogeneous and often not replicated across studies. Even significant predictors often explain only a relatively small or clinically insignificant amount of variance in resilience.
conclusionThe results are not yet ready for direct implementation into practice and the development of appropriate prevention programs on the basis of significant predictors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29931539What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.