Observational studyBMC public health2025
Mediation role of health behaviours in the relation between mental resilience and cardiovascular risk in young adults with a diagnosed congenital heart defect.
Observational study in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
introductionWith age, patients with a congenital heart defect are under higher risk of cardiovascular diseases and more complex selfcare requirements. AIM OF THE STUDY: The analysis of the mediation role of health-oriented behaviours in the relation between mental resilience and the cardiovascular risk in young adults with congenital heart defects. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is an observational study with a cross-sectional design. The research was based on the examination of 201 patients with congenital heart defects using the medical record analysis, the method of estimating and the diagnostic survey method. The other examination tools included the Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors Scale, the Resilience Assessment Scale (SPP-25) and the Health Behaviour Inventory (HBI).
resultsThe examination confirmed that 50% of patients were susceptible to a cardiovascular disease due to the prevalence of three risk factors. The general indicator of the intensity of health-related behaviours amounted to 83.16 ± 12.94. The lowest intensity of all health behaviours was observed for eating habits (3.14 ± 0.83). The highest score of mental resilience was reported in terms of openness to new experience and sense of humour (15.31 ± 3.05), whereas the lowest was related to optimism and mobilization capability in difficult situations (12.97 ± 3.46). The higher the perseverance and determination (β = -0.16; p < 0.001), openness and sense of humour (β = -0.09; p < 0.01), tolerance to failure and perceiving life as a challenge (β = -0.09; p < 0.01), optimism and the mobilization capability in difficult situations (β = -0.08; p < 0.01) and overall mental resilience scale measurement (β = -0.11; p < 0.001), the lower the cardiovascular risk. In short, higher psychological resilience was associated with higher intensity of health-related behaviours. Greater intensity of health behaviours and higher indices of eating habits, prophylactic behaviours and health practices fostered lower risk of CVDs.
conclusionsHealth-related behaviours play a mediation role between mental resilience and the cardiovascular risk in the group of young adults with congenital heart defects. Psychological resilience as a preventive and promotional factor of mental health appears to be of a very essential value while developing health promoting programmes aimed at decreasing the cardiovascular risk in patients with a congenital heart defect. The evaluation of mental resilience may provide better understanding of the patient and ensure proper health care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.