Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:To explore the psychological status and its relationship with alexithymia in patients with somatoform disorder.Method:60 patients with somatoform disorder(patients group)and 60 healthy volunteers(controlled group)were tested with symptom checklist 90(SCL-90)and Toronto alexithymia scale(TAS).Correlated analysis between psychological status and alexithymia was conducted in patients with somatoform disorder.Results:The total scores of SCL-90 and six factor scores such as somatozation,interpersonal sensitivity,depression,anxiety,paranoid ideation and psychoticism were significantly higher in patients group compared with that in controlled group(P0.05 or P0.01).Meanwhile,the total score of TAS and factor scores ofⅠ,Ⅱand Ⅳ were also obviously higher in patients group(P0.05 or P0.01);however,there was no significant difference in the score of factor Ⅲ between the two groups.The total score of SCL-90 in patients group correlated with the total score of TAS and the factor scores of Ⅰ,Ⅱand Ⅳ significantly and positively.Conclusion:Patients with somatoform disorder tend to have a poorer psychological status,which is related to alexithymia.
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) | 0.002 | 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".