ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2026
Psychosocial Factors and Patient Activation in Ocular Trauma: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Path Analysis.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Ocular trauma can affect not only visual function but also psychological adjustment and engagement in care. This study examined social support, general self-efficacy, illness acceptance, and patient activation among patients with ocular trauma and tested whether a hypothesized observed-variable path model linking these constructs was supported. Patients and Methods: A single-center cross-sectional study was conducted among 184 hospitalized patients with ocular trauma recruited using convenience sampling. Social support, general self-efficacy, illness acceptance, and patient activation were assessed using self-report questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, Spearman correlation analysis, Kruskal-Wallis tests with Benjamini-Hochberg-adjusted pairwise comparisons, multivariable linear regression, and exploratory observed-variable path analysis were performed. Results: The mean scores for social support, general self-efficacy, illness acceptance, and patient activation were 41.03 ± 7.51, 31.85 ± 5.09, 27.76 ± 6.18, and 65.69 ± 17.91, respectively. No statistically significant correlations were observed among the four psychosocial variables. Illness acceptance differed significantly across age groups after Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment, whereas social support, general self-efficacy, and patient activation did not. In the adjusted regression model, older age remained associated with higher illness acceptance. The exploratory path analysis did not support the hypothesized direct or indirect pathways. The serial indirect effect of social support on patient activation through general self-efficacy and illness acceptance was not statistically significant. Conclusion: In this single-center cross-sectional study, social support, general self-efficacy, illness acceptance, and patient activation were not significantly associated with one another among patients with ocular trauma. Older age was associated with higher illness acceptance, but this finding requires confirmation in studies that include ocular trauma-specific clinical and psychological factors. Future longitudinal research is needed to clarify psychosocial adjustment and patient engagement after ocular trauma.
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.