Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34589174›Full record

Observational studyEuropean journal of psychotraumatology2021

Reflections on psychological resilience: a comparison of three conceptually different operationalizations in predicting mental health.

Anna Kuranova, Sanne H Booij, Albertine J Oldehinkel, Marieke Wichers, Bertus Jeronimus, Johanna T W Wigman

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in European journal of psychotraumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anna KuranovaInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4556-1584
Sanne H BooijInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Albertine J OldehinkelInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3925-3913
Marieke WichersInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Bertus JeronimusDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Johanna T W WigmanInterdisciplinary Center Psychopathology and Emotion Regulation (ICPE), University Medical Center Groningen, University Center Psychiatry (UCP), University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Psychological resilience refers to the ability to maintain mental health or recover quickly after stress. Despite the popularity of resilience research, there is no consensus understanding or operationalization of resilience. Objective: We plan to compare three indicators of resilience that each involve a different operationalization of the construct: a) General resilience or one's self-reported general ability to overcome adversities; b) Daily resilience as momentarily experienced ability to overcome adversities; and c) Recovery speed evident in the pattern of negative affect recovery after small adversities in daily life. These three indicators are constructed per person to investigate their cross-sectional associations, stability over time, and predictive validity regarding mental health. Methods: Data will be derived from the prospective MIRORR study that comprises 96 individuals at different levels of psychosis risk and contains both single-time assessed questionnaires and 90-days intensive longitudinal data collection at baseline (T0) and three yearly follow-up waves (T1-T3). General resilience is assessed using the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS) at baseline. Daily resilience is measured by averaging daily resilience scores across 90 days. For recovery speed, vector-autoregressive models with consecutive impulse response simulations will be applied to diary data on negative affect and daily stressors to calculate pattern of affect recovery. These indicators will be correlated concurrently (at T0) to assess their overlap and prospectively (between T0 and T1) to estimate their stability. Their predictive potential will be assessed by regression analysis with mental health (SCL-90) as an outcome, resilience indicators as predictors, and stressful life events as a moderator. Conclusion: The comparison of different conceptualizations of psychological resilience can increase our understanding of its multifaceted nature and, in future, help improve diagnostic, prevention and intervention strategies aimed at increasing psychological resilience.

Indexed as

Mental HealthResearch DesignResilience, PsychologicalCross-Sectional StudiesDiaries as TopicHumansLongitudinal StudiesProspective StudiesPsychotic DisordersRisk FactorsSurveys and Questionnairesdaily resilienceestrésmental healthPsychological resiliencerecovery speedresiliencia diariaResiliencia psicológicasalud mentalstressvelocidad de recuperación应激心理健康心理韧性恢复速度日常韧性

Identifiers

PMID34589174
PMCPMC8475143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.