MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587488524 · doi:10.30552/ejhr.v2i3.37

Alexitimia y disfrute de la vida en mayores institucionalizados versus aula de mayores

2016· article· es· W2587488524 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julia García-Sevilla, Inmaculada Méndez, Ana Ma Bermúdez, Isabel García-Munuera, Yolanda Clemente San Román

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean journal of health research · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPersonaPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A line of research that has attracted a great interest is the study of personal beliefs about the ability to enjoy life and that may be affected in people with alexithymia. The objectives were to analyze the relationship between alexithymia and capacity for the enjoyment of life by comparing a group of students enrolled in the older classroom of Murcia University with a group of users within an institutionalized elderly. A cross-sectional design was used. Study participants were 80 subjects of whom 50 people were in the senior classroom (M: 68.86 years; DT: 11,99). Abbreviated Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the Beliefs About Enjoy Life Questionnaire were used in the study. The relevant permits were requested to the management center/director of the institutionalized elderly and the senior classroom. The results showed that institutionalized people lowest in Enjoy the Moment. Significant correlations between reminiscent of the good times and the difficulty in identifying feelings were found, as well as with the pattern of externally oriented thinking. It is important to develop programs which promote the enjoyment of life to manage emotions in people with 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.057
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0570.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.325 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean journal of health researchSame topicAging, Health, and DisabilityFrench-language works237,207