ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
Heterogeneity in medical coping modes and the moderating role of social support on social disability in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to identify heterogeneous patterns of medical coping modes (MCM) and to examine the moderating role of social support in the relationship between these patterns and social disability in young and middle-aged patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 129 post-PCI patients from a single center in China. Participants completed the Medical Coping Modes Questionnaire (MCMQ), the Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS), and the Social Disability Screening Schedule (SDSS). Latent profile analysis (LPA) was used to identify distinct coping patterns. The moderation effect of social support was tested using the Johnson-Neyman technique. Results: Two distinct coping profiles were identified via LPA: "Adaptive Copers" (55.1%), characterized by higher confrontation and lower avoidance/resignation, and "Maladaptive Copers" (44.9%), showing the opposite pattern. A counterintuitive finding emerged, with the Maladaptive Copers reporting significantly lower social disability scores. Furthermore, beyond this profile differentiation, social support demonstrated a significant U-shaped moderating effect in the coping-disability relationship. Its moderating role was statistically significant only at very low (<39.884) and very high (>52.924) levels of support. Conclusion: This study reveals two key findings: first, post-PCI patients are heterogeneous in coping, comprising adaptive and maladaptive subgroups; second, the impact of these coping styles on social disability is non-linearly moderated by social support. Clinicians should assess both coping profiles and social support levels to tailor interventions effectively.
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.