Is alexithymia a personality trait increasing the risk of depression? A prospective study evaluating alexithymia before, during and after a depressive episode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether alexithymia is a personality trait that increases the risk of major depression (MD) is still debated. In this prospective study, alexithymic levels were evaluated before, during and after a depressive episode. METHOD: The alexithymic levels, the presence of MD and the severity of anxious-depressive symptoms were evaluated at intervals of about 1 month in pregnant women attending the Centers for Prenatal Care, using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). RESULTS: Sixteen women affected by MD, 21 affected by subthreshold depression and 112 non-depressed women were included in the study. Women who developed depression, compared to non-depressed women, showed similar TAS and HADS scores during the pre-morbid phase, a significant increase in the scores during depression and a significant decrease after remission, whereas no change was observed in non-depressed women. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that in pregnant women alexithymia does not represent a personality trait that increases the risk of developing a depressive episode, and they support the hypothesis that alexithymia is a state-dependent phenomenon in depressed pregnant women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".