The effect of alexithymia on anxiety, depression, coping, and difficulties in daily living in oncologic patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Alexithymia is a personality trait that may influence the resilience in oncologic patients. Objectives Data on the effect of alexithymia on anxiety, depression, coping, and difficulties in daily living in oncologic patients are lacking. Aims To test how alexithymia may influence the development of anxiety, depression, difficulties in daily living, and coping in oncologic patients if compared to healthy volunteers. Methods Healthy subjects with high level of alexithymia, healthy subjects with low level of alexithymia, oncologic patients with high level of alexithymia, and oncologic patients with low level of alexithymia were compared. The Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used to assess alexithymia, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) allowed to assess anxiety and depression, the Brief COPE was used to assess the coping, and the dimension of daily living of the Behaviour And Symptom Identification Scale (BASIS-32) was used to assess the difficulties in daily living. The differences among the groups were analysed by means of the analyses of covariance controlling for age, education, marital status, and working activity. Results A total of 124 subjects participated to the study (57 oncologic patients and 67 healthy subjects). Results showed a between-subjects effect of alexithymia. Subjects with higher level of alexithymia had higher scores in anxiety and depression, higher difficulties in daily living, and lower problem-focused and dysfunctional coping strategies, regardless of having cancer or not. Conclusions Alexithymia seems to influence the development of anxiety/depression, the functional daily living, and some strategies of coping more than having cancer.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".