Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41846841›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2026

Cognitive appraisal processes and health: from bench to bedside.

Carolyn E Schwartz, Richard L Skolasky, Bruce D Rapkin, Katrina Borowiec, Joel A Finkelstein

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Response shift-adjusted longitudinal assessment of patient-reported outcomes in older people living with HIV: a multilevel structural equation and Rasch analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Carolyn E SchwartzDeltaQuest Foundation, Inc., Concord, MA, United States.
Richard L SkolaskyDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Bruce D RapkinDepartment of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, United States.
Katrina BorowiecDeltaQuest Foundation, Inc., Concord, MA, United States.
Joel A FinkelsteinDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/objectives: After two decades of cognitive-appraisal research in spine surgery and other medically ill patients, the present work reviewed the published literature on cognitive-appraisal processes and health outcomes to determine key findings and considerations, and how they point to appraisal-assessment based interventions to improve clinical outcomes. Methods: The present work reviewed the published literature on cognitive-appraisal processes and health outcomes to determine key findings and considerations, and how they point to interventions to improve clinical outcomes. These implications were further examined in terms of when such appraisal processes should be addressed and how individual differences should be explicitly considered. Results: The literature review identified 53 articles, of which 26 were retained for further review and 27 were excluded because they either (1) used a different definition of cognitive appraisal or (2) focused solely on measurement development; methodological or statistical development; or theory development. The findings from the retained studies highlighted the following cognitive-appraisal processes in order of frequency of mention: Sampling of Experience, Standards of Comparison, Frame of Reference, and Combinatory Algorithm. Empirical findings also generally supported more interventions on appraisal processes after surgery rather than before. An appraisal-assessment based intervention is proposed that builds on the empirical evidence. Conclusion: It is our hope that the present work has provided the next logical step in response-shift research, moving from basic, foundational findings to implications for clinical interventions that can help medically ill patients recover in more lasting and deeper ways from surgery and other health state changes.

Indexed as

CognitionOutcome Assessment, Health CareHumanscognitive appraisal processescognitive-behavioral therapyinterventionresponse shiftreview

Identifiers

PMID41846841
PMCPMC12989588

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.