Dental anxiety and alexithymia: Gender differences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Alexithymia refers to a personality construct that is characterized by impoverishment of imagination, poor capacity for symbolic thought, and inability to experience and describe feelings. Our aim was to investigate the association of alexithymia and dental anxiety in patients attending dental practice. A further aim was to discover whether gender differences exist in this association when adjusting for the effect of age. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data were collected among adult (18 +years) patients attending the public dental health centers in Pori, Finland. Patients received a questionnaire assessing dental anxiety (Modified Dental Anxiety Scale, MDAS), alexithymia (20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale, TAS-20), and demographic profile. Total score and scores for three TAS factors: 1) "difficulty identifying with feelings", 2) "difficulty describing feelings", and 3) "externally orientated thinking", were computed. RESULTS: Of 823 patients, 81% correctly completed the questionnaires. Nine percent belonged to the high anxiety (MDAS score 19 or higher) group and 7% reported alexithymia (total score 61 or higher). The prevalence of alexithymia was 15.5% among those reporting high dental anxiety compared with 5.9% among those reporting low dental anxiety (p = 0.005). Those with high dental anxiety scored higher in TAS factor 1 than those with lower dental anxiety. No statistically significant bivariate associations with other TAS factors were found. When adjusting for the effect of age and gender, the association between TAS factors and dichotomized MDAS was significant in all TAS scores except TAS factor 3. CONCLUSIONS: In a sample representing Finnish adult dental patients, alexithymia was associated with dental anxiety.
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) | 0.007 | 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".