The Effect of Horticulture Therapy Program Focusing on Cultivation about the Personal Relationship, Self-Esteem, and Mood of Chronic Schizophrenic Patients According to Alexithymia Levels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to feasibility search about horticultural therapy program focusing on cultivation with emotion promotion program for chronic schizophrenic patients according to alexithymia levels by analyzing effect on personal relationship, self-esteem and mood. This study was conducted once a week from March 26 th , 2014 to June 11 th , 2014 at health center in Haman for 10 chronic schizophrenic patients. Only heavy alexithymia group had significant decline about factor 1 (difficulty identifying feelings: F1) and factor 2 (difficulty describing feelings: F2) in TAS-20K after horticultural therapy program focusing on cultivation. And confidence, openness, and understanding scores in relationship respectively increased significant (1.4 score, 5 score, 5.4 score). In addition self-esteem increased significant score in heavy and none-heavy alexithymia group without reference to alexithymia. On the other hand, mood had not significant to both. This result showed a possibility of horticultural therapy program focusing on cultivation for chronic schizophrenic patients according to alexithymia levels as therapeutic tool.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".