Depression and alexithymia on weight perception in patients with metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity's increasing follows decreased perception of weight status in obese persons, mainly female, undergoing age-related changes. OBJECTIVE: To study weight perception and psychological alterations associated to MS and T2DM. METHODS: 200 patients selected from Metabolic Syndrome Outpatient Clinic of University of Campinas. Instruments: Beck Depression and Beck Anxiety Inventories', Toronto Alexithymia Scale-26s, questionnaire and data from reports. Approved by Unicamp Research Ethic Committee. RESULTS: Patients aged 18-40 years perceived their weight higher than actual (A < D) (p = 0.0272), amongst untreated hypertensive (p = 0.037). ≥41 years old patient's subdivided into A = D and A > D. A = D had 4.3 more chances to be alexithymic than A < D. 35% of A < D accepted their physical appearance, contrarily A = D (66%) and A > D (69%) (p = 0.0018). 50% of A < D felt offended by social aggression due to their weight; A = D (20%) and A > D (34%) (p = 0.007). 3.6 more chances of A > D than A < D using anti-hypertensive drugs (p = 0.021) (≥41 years old) and 3.5 more chances to perceive A = D (41-60 years old) (p = 0.023). A = D presented 3.8 more chances of depression than A < D and 4.3 more chances of alexithymia than A < D (62% of 41-60 year-old patients with higher cholesterol, mainly LDL and hyper-triglycerides). A = D with alexithymia, partially linked with higher cholesterol, suggests neuroinflammation due to hypertriglycerides. Females, who declared had been anteriorly made diet as treatment to lose weight were exactly those who perceived their weight A > D (45%, p = 0.0091). CONCLUSIONS: Age as a period of development, in which cultural influences occurs, was a factor in weight misperception. A < D and A > D were distinct in age, history of obesity and BMI.
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".