Dietary patterns are associated with the prevalence of alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent evidence supports the association between healthy dietary patterns and a reduced risk of depression. The objective was: (1) to examine the associations between dietary patterns and alexithymic features; and (2) investigate whether these possible associations are explained by depressive symptoms in a cross-sectional study among the Finnish general population aged 25-65 years. The study population was a part of the population-based Kuopio Depression Study (KUDEP) conducted in central-eastern Finland (n = 1747). Dietary data were collected using a food frequency questionnaire and dietary patterns from 22 predefined food groups, which were extracted by factor analysis. Alexithymia was assessed using the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and depression using the 21-item Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-21). Altogether, 173 of the study subjects (9.9%) were alexithymic. Three dietary patterns were identified: "prudent," "Western" and "traditional." Lower scores for a healthy prudent dietary pattern and higher scores for an unhealthy Western dietary pattern were associated with an increased likelihood of belonging to the alexithymic group among subjects with elevated depressive symptoms. Among subjects without depressive symptoms, alexithymia was associated with lower scores in the prudent dietary pattern, but also with higher scores in the traditional dietary pattern. General population subjects with alexithymic features may have unhealthier dietary patterns than non-alexithymic subjects.
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".