ALEXITHYMIA AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS AMONG WOMEN UNDERGOING IN VITRO FERTILIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to analyze the relationship between alexithymia, anxiety, physical problems, trauma, and psychological distress in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study was based on 78 women (mean age = 34.4 ys) who were referred to a fertility treatment with in vitro fertilization. The questionnaires (socio-demographic questionnaire, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, and Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation - Outcome Measure) were administered by the investigators. RESULTS: Our results suggest that alexithymia was significantly correlated to anxiety (r=0.506, p=0.00), depression (r=0.591, p=0.00), physical problems (r=0.477, p=0.00), trauma (r=0.512, p=0.00), and psychological distress (r=0.598, p=0.00). Furthermore, high alexithymia group showed significantly higher levels of anxiety (F=4.65, p=0.00), depression (F=2.30, p=0.00), trauma (F=1.80, p=0.00) and general psychological distress (F=2.85, p=0.04) than the low alexithymia group. CONCLUSIONS: Results of the present study point out that alexithymia could be considered a potential risk factor for high levels of anxiety, depression and general psychological distress. It may also be used as an indicator of a need for further psychological support aimed at women undergoing in vitro fertilization.
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".