An examination of the relationship between alexithymia and somatic complaints of mothers and obsessive-compulsive features of children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective:The study aims to determine the relationship of alexithymic features and somatization levels in their mothers to obsessive-compulsive features in children.Participants:The sample of our research is composed of 173 mothers and 173 children who are in high school in Osmaniye province. Methods:Sociodemographic data form developed by the researcher, Symptom Check List (SCL-90-R) (Somatisation subscale), Maudsley Obsessive Compulsive Questionaire (MOCQ), and 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) is used as a data collection tool. Results:It was found that there was a strong positive correlation between MOCQ total scores of children with SCL-90's (r = 0,776) Somatization subscale scores and Alexithymia Total scores (r = 0,613) of mothers. Also, all Subscales of MOCQ scores are correlated with TAS-20 subscales and SCL-90 (Somatization subscale) except rumination subscale of MOCQ scales. Conclusion:Mothers who come from ignorant feelings and have somatic complaints affect the relationship with their children significantly. As a result of this relationship, obsessive thoughts increase in children.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".