ArticleInternational journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP
Dyadic coping in couples experiencing mild cognitive impairment.
Article in International journal of clinical and health psychology : IJCHP. 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
Background: The diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) can create stress for patients and their care partners (dyads). This study aimed to understand how dyadic coping (DC; how well couples feel they cope together in the face of a stressor) is related to the psychological health and overall well-being of couples coping with an MCI diagnosis. Additionally, this study attempted to characterize the impact of the HABIT Healthy Action to Benefit Independence & Thinking® program as a novel approach for improving DC. Methods: We analyzed DC in 213 people with MCI (pwMCI) and 205 care partners using the Dyadic Coping Inventory (Bodenmann, 2005). We compared DC scores to outcome measures of psychological health and well-being. We also analyzed DC in a subset of 135 pwMCI and 138 care partners with 3-month post HABIT DC scores to look for evidence of change. Results: pwMCI and care partner DC significantly affected their own perception of emotional functioning on other measures [quality of life (QoL) and mood for pwMCI and QoL, mood, anxiety, and sense of burden for care partners]. pwMCI DC also predicted care partner anxiety. In all cases, better DC predicted better emotional functioning. Care partner DC was also found to significantly relate to how they rated the pwMCI's cognitive and daily functioning as well as the pwMCI's adherence with a cognitive rehabilitation intervention. pwMCI and care partners with low baseline DC showed an increase in DC scores after completing HABIT, as did pwMCI in the medium baseline DC group. Care partners with medium baseline DC did not experience change post HABIT. High copers in both the pwMCI and care partner groups experienced a decline in DC, although scores remained average to above average. Conclusion: These results suggest that DC is an important part of a couple's psychological health and well-being in MCI. Care partner DC may be particularly important in how partners rate their loved one's cognitive and functional status and how they respond to cognitive rehabilitation intervention. The HABIT program may also represent a novel way to improve DC for low and medium coping couples.
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.