P03-211 - Relationship Of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder And Alexithymia With Relapse During 12 Months In Male Alcohol Dependent Inpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alexithymia with relapse to alcohol use during 12 month follow-up after inpatient treatment in male alcohol dependents. Age at regular alcohol use, severity of alcohol related problems and psychiatric symptoms were controlled while evaluating these relationships. Method Among 156 consecutively admitted male alcohol dependents 136 could be reached at the end of 12 months. Patients were investigated with the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale, the Symptom Check List and the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST) and with the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) at baseline. Results Among 136 alcohol dependent patients 66.2% (n=90) were considered to be relapsed according to telephone interview. Among these 102 were interviewed face to face. Rate of alexithymia and relapse and mean of “difficulty in identifying feelings-DIF” of TAS-20 were higher in PTSD group. Other than these there were no significant relationship between PTSD, alexithymia and relapse. PTSD diagnosis predicted relapse during 12 month follow-up (n=136). When only those who were evaluable to interview face to face included, only DIF predicted relapse (n=102). Conclusions PTSD and alexithymia (particularly DIF factor) may be related with relapse during 12 month follow-up. This study suggest that rather than the early onset of alcohol use, the severity of alcohol related problems and the general psychiatric symptoms, PTSD and DIF, which may be related, are two factors to focus when relapse prevention programs are planning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".