The relationship between alopecia areata and alexithymia, anxiety and depression: A case-control study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alopecia areata (AA) is a skin disease characterized by the sudden appearance of areas of hair loss on the scalp and other hair-bearing areas, but its aesthetic repercussions can lead to profound changes in patient's psychological status and relationships. AIM: The goal was to investigate a possible relationship between AA and alexithymia as well as two other emotional dimensions, anxiety and depression. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with AA seen in the Department of Dermatology of Hedi Chaker University Hospital, Sfax were included in this study. Anxiety and depression were evaluated by Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale questionnaire, alexithymia was assessed by Toronto Alexithymia scale 20, and severity of AA was measured by Severity of Alopecia Tool. RESULTS: Patient's mean age was 32.92 years. 52% of patients were females. Depression and anxiety were detected respectively in 38% and 62% of patients. There was statistically significant difference between patients and control group in terms of depression (P = 0.047) and anxiety (P = 0.005). Forty-two percent of patients scored positive for alexithymia. No significant difference was found between patient and control groups (P = 0.683) in terms of alexithymia. Anxiety was responsible for 14.7% of variation in alexithymia (P = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows a high prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms in AA patients. Dermatologists should be aware of the psychological impact of AA, especially as current treatments have limited effectiveness.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it