ArticleBMC pediatrics2024
Testing a model of benefit-finding and growth in youths with chronic health conditions.
Article in BMC pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identity with Diabetes: Unpacking an Overlooked but Essential Dimension of the Diabetes Experience.Current diabetes reports · 2025Review
- Positive Psychology Insights on the Effects of Spirituality on Shared Decision-Making in Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: The Chain-Mediated Effects of Benefit-Finding and Decision Self-Efficacy.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Youth benefit finding and caregiving in a parental illness context: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Coping Tendency as a Mediator in the Relationship Between Psychological Resilience and Health Problems Among College Students.Psychology research and behavior management · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe experience of benefit-finding and growth (BFG), defined as perceiving positive life changes resulting from adversity, is increasingly studied among youths with chronic health conditions (CCs). However, empirical evidence is scarce for explaining individual differences in BFG. The study aimed to test a model of BFG, including an interplay of personal and environmental factors and coping processes.
methodsA sample of N = 498 youths (12-21 years) recruited from three German patient registries for CCs (type 1 diabetes: n = 388, juvenile idiopathic arthritis: n = 82, cystic fibrosis: n = 28) completed a questionnaire including self-reported optimism, social support from parents and peers, coping strategies, and BFG. The model was created to reflect the theoretical assumptions of the Life Crisis and Personal Growth model and current empirical evidence. Structural equation modeling was conducted to evaluate the incremental explanatory power of optimism, peer group integration, parental support, acceptance, cognitive reappraisal, and seeking social support over and above sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics.
resultsThe model (CFI = 0.93; RMSEA = 0.04; SRMR = 0.05) explained 32% of the variance in BFG. Controlling for sociodemographic and disease-related characteristics, acceptance, cognitive reappraisal, and seeking social support were directly and positively linked to BFG. All tested coping strategies significantly mediated the association between optimism and BFG, whereas seeking social support significantly mediated the relation between peer group integration and BFG. DISCUSSION: The study stresses the prominent role of emotion-focused coping strategies and peer group integration in enhancing BFG in youths with CCs.
trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS), no. DRKS00025125. Registered on May 17, 2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.