Alexithymia,Personality Characteristic and Mental Condition in Patients with Essential Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate alexithymia , personality characteristic and mental condition in patients with essential hypertension. Methods Fifty-one patients with essential hypertension were assessed using Eysenck personality questionnaire (EPQ), Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS-20) and the symptom checklist-90 (SCL-90). The results were compared with those of Chinese ordinary model. Results The E score of EPQ of the patients with essential hypertension was lower than that of the Chinese ordinary model, while the N, P and L scores was higher. The total score and the scores of all factors of SCL-90 were significantly higher than that of Chinese ordinary model. The total score of TAS-20 and score of factor 1, factor 2 were positively correlated with the scores of all factors of SCL-90, while factor 3 score had no significant correlation with SCL-90. The E score of EPQ was negatively correlated with the scores of all factors of SCL-90, while N and P score were positively correlated with them. Conclusion Patients with essential hypertension were inner personality, unstable psychological status and neuroticism showing alexithymia and obvious psychological symptoms.
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 | 0.001 | 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".