Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to study associations between self-assessed alexithymia and sleep disorders. Five groups of patients with different sleep disorders were compared on the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). The prevalence of alexithymia, as defined by the cut-off score of TAS >60 was 17% among all patients, but differed among the groups: Primary Insomnia (PRI, n = 119) 6.7%, Insomnia related to Another Mental Disorder (IMD, n = 98) 20.4%, Insomnia due to a General Medical Condition (IGM, n = 38) 8.1%, Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS, n = 40) 17.5%, and Periodic Limb Movements during Sleep (PLMS, n = 42) 14.3%. The results diverged with regard to the three TAS Factors. On Factor 1 (Difficulties Identifying Feelings) the IMD group scored significantly higher than all the other groups. On Factor 2 (Difficulties Describing Feelings) the IMD and OSAS groups scored higher than the PRI and IGM groups. And finally, on Factor 3 (Externally Oriented Thinking), the OSAS and PLMS groups scored higher than the insomnia groups.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".