MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2354452224

Control study on alexithymia and mental health of new recruits being only children

2008· article· en· W2354452224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gao Cun-you

Bibliographic record

VenuePractical Journal of Medicine & Pharmacy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychoticismHostilityToronto Alexithymia ScaleSymptom Checklist 90Mental healthAnxietyClinical psychologyPsychologySomatizationChecklistMedicinePsychiatryPersonalityBig Five personality traits
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To explore the alexithymia level and the mental health status of new recruits being only children. Methods Two-hudred forty and among whom data of only children were compared with that of non-only children. New recruits were investigated by Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) and Symptom Checklist-90(SCL-90).Results The only children presented lower scores than not-only children in TAS total scores (P=0.024),and revealed higher scores in the factor of Ⅳ(P=0.010). Compared with Chinese norms,the hostility scores of SCL-90 in only children were higher(P=0.034),and the scores of obsession-compulsion,phobic anxiety and psychoticism were lower(P0.05).Conclusion There is no significant difference in the level of alexithymia between only children and not-only childen. Compared with Chinese norms,the mental health status of only children doesn’t show any difference.

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)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePractical Journal of Medicine & Pharmacy→Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments→French-language works237,207→