MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110115393

Stress-overcoming behaviour of women with minor cardiac abnormalities

2013· article· en· W2110115393 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
М. М. Курако, А. И. Кодочигова, В. Ф. Киричук, Е. С. Оленко, Ksenia Belousova, П. А. Протасов, Andrey Ilyin, А.П. Бурлака

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaAbnormalityCoping (psychology)PsychologyConnective tissueClinical psychologyMedicineCardiologyInternal medicinePsychiatryPathology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Normal 0 false false false RU X-NONE X-NONE The purpose of this research was to determine stress-overcoming behaviour of women with minor cardiac abnormalities considering abnormality intensity. With the help of Toronto Alexithymia Scale, E. Heim`s system and S. Subbotin`s test 122 young women with different manifestation rates of the heart connective tissue dysplasia (minimal – basic group and moderate - comparison group) were examine d (average age –21,46 ± 2,12 years). Significant dominance of adaptive coping strategies in all spheres was revealed when studying of stress-overcoming behaviour of healthy women with minor cardiac abnormalities of minimal intensity. Women of the comparison group used maladaptive coping-strategies in emotional and behavioural spheres more often comparing with clinically healthy women of the basic group. Significantly lower level of the stress resistance and higher alexithymia level were determined in the observed group with minor cardiac abnormalities of moderate intensity which has chosen maladaptive emotional and behavioural coping-strategies. The results are appropriate to consider for personalized arrangements for prevention of cardiovascular complications in patients with heart connective tissue dysplasia syndrome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207