ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder patients dyadic coping patterns: a latent profile analysis.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to identify latent subgroups of dyadic coping (DC) patterns among patients with neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (NMOSD) and examine factors associated with subgroup classification. Design: A cross-sectional study. Methods: The study was conducted from June 2023 to August 2024, enrolling 137 patients with NMOSD. Data were collected via standardized instruments: a demographic questionnaire, the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI), the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) for depression screening, and the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7). Latent profile analysis (LPA) was performed using Mplus 8.11 to identify coping subgroups, with distal outcomes (PHQ-9 and GAD-7) examined via the Bolck, Croon, and Hagenaars (BCH) method, followed by multivariate logistic regression to assess subgroup associated factor. Results: Analysis of the positive and negative coping dimensions revealed three distinct profiles among 137 participants: LP-HN (Low positive-High negative coping, Conclusion: NMOSD patients demonstrate heterogeneous DC patterns. The healthcare payment method identified as the key associated factor. The MP-MHN subgroup, with the highest psychological burden despite moderate positive coping, warrants prioritized interventions.
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.