Ocena związków poczucia wpływu na przebieg schizofrenii z temperamentem i aleksytymią
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The aim of this paper is to present two different studies exploring relations between self-influence on the course of schizopherania and 1) alexithymia, 2) temperament. Material and methods. In the first study took part 95 persons (42 women, 52 men) of mean age 45.53 (SD = 16.44). In the second study took part 90 persons (36 women, 54 men) of mean age 42,63 (SD=12,75). In both studies participants were outpatients and inpatients with schizophrenia according to International Classification of Diseases and Health Related Problems. They filled self-ratings scales in the first study: Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Brief Measure to Assess Perception of Self-Influence on the Disease Course - 13 items version for schizophrenia; in the second study: Emotionality, Activity and Sociability Temperament Survey (EAS-D), Brief Measure to Assess Perception of Self-Influence on the Disease Course - 5 items version for schizophrenia. Results and conclusions. It was observed no significant correlation between self-influence on the disease course and alexithymia. It was also found that self-influence on the schizophrenia course is not related to biological conditioned dimension of personality - temperament (only Sociability scale of EAS-D correlates with self-influence on the disease course). The study confirms earlier results that traits of alexithymia are related to schizophrenia. Psychiatry 2010; 7, 1: 25-32
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".