Bibliographic record
Abstract
【Objectives: The purpose of this study is to investigate the usefulness of psychological measurements in depression symptoms as compared with non-depressions and hwabyung. Methods: A total of 21 patients, who were diagnosed with depression and hwabyung, were evaluated by using the SCL-90-R, BDI, STAI, STAXI, ISI, HRSD, 20-Item Alexithymia Scale, BSDS and NEO-PI. Thereafter, they were statistically analyzed. Results: 1) In the results of SCL-90-R, the PST score group of hwa-byung group without depression was significantly higher when compared to the score from the depression group without hwa-byung. 2) In the results of NEO-PI, the NEO-PI-O score of hwa-byung group without depression was significantly higher when compared to the score from the depression group without hwa-byung. 3) In the results of 20-Item Alexithymia Scale, the total score and score of difficulty for identifying feelings scale from the depression group was significantly higher when compared to the score of non depression group. Conclusions: The results found are expected to serve as a useful resource for future studies when developing the instruments of oriental medical evaluations for hwa-byung.】
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".