Analysis of related factors of alexithymia in depression patients with somatic symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To investigate related factors of alexithymia in depression patients with somatic symptoms. Methods:A case-control study was used,and 130 patients were collected,who met the tenth edition of the international classification of diseases(ICD-l0) diagnostic criteria for depression with a score of 17-item Hamilton depression scale 17 of greater than or equal to 17 points. The patients with the SCL-90 somatization factor score of greater than 2 were chosen as depression with somatic symptoms group(study group),while those with the SCL-90 somatization factor score of less than or equal to 2were used as depression without somatic symptoms group(control group). Alexithymia of all the patients was evaluated with Toronto alexithymia scale(TAS-20) and its related factors were analyzed and compared. Results:(1) study group had higher alexithymia scored,and had the statistical significance(P 0. 01).(2) The higher depression score was,the more severe alexithymia was.(3) TAS factor 1 and 3 symptom factors were positively correlated,factor 2 and 5 symptom factors were positively correlated,while factor 3 and 8 symptom factors were negatively correlated,and they all were statistically significant(P 0. 05). Conclusions:The depression patients with somatic symptoms have obvious alexithymia. Gender,years of education,severity of depression are important factors for these patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".