Investigating Alexithymia among Women with and Without Thyroid Cancer in Isfahan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The current study aimed to investigate and compare alexithymia in women with thyroid cancer and women without thyroid cancer in Isfahan, Iran. Methods: The study population included all patients with thyroid cancer and those without cancer who were referred to Sayedalshohda Hospital in the city of Isfahan. Through convenience sampling, 25 women with thyroid cancer and 25 women without thyroid cancer were selected. The tool used for data collection was the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) (Taylor, 1986). The collected data were analyzed both descriptively – computing the mean and standard deviation – and inferentially – computing analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) – to investigate alexithymia in women with and without thyroid cancer. Results: The results showed a significant difference between the variables of alexithymia in the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Regarding the problems caused by cancer, it is suggested that there is a need for educating and giving consultations to patients with cancer in order for them to identify and express negative emotions, diminish their problems, and increase their ability to cope with thyroid cancer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".