The relationship between alexithymia and general symptoms of pregnant women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Alexithymia is related to poor emotion regulation strategies as well as higher rates of somatic disorders. The aim of the present study was to assess the relationship between alexithymia and the general symptoms experienced by the pregnant women. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, a total number of 350 pregnant women, attending the antenatal clinics, were randomly selected. A standardized Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used to elicit responses from participants with alexithymia. The general symptoms scores were measured using the Iranian version of the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised, 90 items. The statistical associations between alexithymia and the general symptoms were then investigated through liner regression. RESULTS: A total number of 186 of pregnant women with alexithymia were compared with the 164 cases without alexithymia. The high scores on Total Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 and the difficulties to identify feelings emerged as major predictors for the current psychopathology on all SCL-90-R subscales. The difficulty in describing feelings features of alexithymia is positively associated with interpersonal sensitivity and paranoid ideation, but it is inversely associated with the phobic anxiety dimension. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the pregnant women with difficulty in describing feelings features of alexithymia are likely to show a broad range of psychopathology. Therefore, it is necessary to emphasize the benefits of specific psychotherapeutic techniques to improve self-differentiation so that we can reduce the likelihood of mental illnesses in pregnant women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".