MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995911135 · doi:10.1186/s40359-019-0353-5

Factors associated with alexithymia among the Lebanese population: results of a cross-sectional study

2019· article· en· W2995911135 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScalePsychologyAnxietyAlcohol Use Disorders Identification TestClinical psychologyPopulationSuicidal ideationPsychiatryCross-sectional studySocial supportPoison controlMedicineSuicide preventionInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To our knowledge, no research project on alexithymia has been conducted in Lebanon. The objective of this study was to assess risk factors associated with alexithymia in a representative sample of the Lebanese population. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, conducted between November 2017 and March 2018, which enrolled 789 participants from al districts of Lebanon. The Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used to measure alexithymia, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test to assess alcohol use, drinking patterns, and alcohol-related issues, the Rosenberg self-esteem scale to evaluate self-worth, the Hamilton depression rating scale and Hamilton Anxiety Scale to screen for depression and anxiety respectively, the Three-Dimensional Work Fatigue Inventory to measure physical, mental and emotional work fatigue respectively, the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale to evaluate suicidal ideation and behavior, the Perceived Stress Scale to measure stress, the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale to help identify a social anxiety disorder and the Quick Emotional Intelligence Self-Assessment to measure emotional intelligence. RESULTS: The results showed that 395 (50.4%) were not alexithymic, 226 (28.8%) were possible alexithymic, whereas 163 (20.8%) were alexithymic according to established clinical cutoffs. Stress (Beta = 0.456), emotional exhaustion (Beta = 0.249), the AUDIT score (Beta = 0.225) and anxiety (Beta = 0.096) were associated with higher alexithymia, whereas low emotional work fatigue (Beta = -0.114) and being married (Beta = -1.933) were associated with lower alexithymia. People in distress (Beta = 7.33) was associated with higher alexithymia scores, whereas people with high wellbeing (Beta = -2.18), an intermediate (Beta = -2.90) and a high (Beta = -2.71) family monthly income were associated with lower alexithymia compared to a low one. CONCLUSION: Alexithymia appears to be influenced by many factors, including stress, anxiety, and burnout. To reduce its prevalence, it is important that health professionals educate the public about these factors. Further studies on a larger scale are needed to confirm our findings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it