MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338905272 · doi:10.17116/jnevro20151151023-6

Alexithymia in patients with left-hemispheric cerebral infarction in the late recovery period

2015· article· en· W2338905272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Н. А. Антонова, E B Kuznetsova, И. И. Шоломов

Bibliographic record

VenueS S Korsakov Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaMedicineDepression (economics)AnxietyCerebral infarctionInfarctionCardiologyRehabilitationInternal medicineToronto Alexithymia ScaleIschemiaAnesthesiaPsychiatryPhysical therapyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To study emotional status, including alexithymia, anxiety and depression, in patients with cerebral infarction in the area of the middle cerebral artery (on the left side) in the late recovery period and to develop a method for correction of the damage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 30 patients with cerebral infarction in the area of the middle cerebral artery (on the left side). A comparison group consisted of 10 patients with chronic brain ischemia. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The results have demonstrated the correlation between the level of alexithymia and the severity of neurological deficit, sex-related level of anxiety and depression. The cerebral infarction impacts on the level of alexithymia. Alexithymia in patients with cerebral infarction affects the adequate self-esteem of physical and mental condition that may complicate the rehabilitation of these patients and demands correction as a combination of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapeutic intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueS S Korsakov Journal of Neurology and PsychiatrySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207