Correlation analysis of alexithymia and psychological distress in breast cancer patients with chemotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate the current status of alexithymia and psychological suffering in breast cancer patients with chemotherapy, and analyze the correlation between them. Methods Totally 128 breast cancer patients underwent chemotherapy were investigated by using the general information questionnaire, Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS-20) and psychological distress thermometer (DT). Results The total score of alexithymia in patients was (57.87±14.78) points, among which the score of disorder in describing affection was (14.94±4.41) points; the score of disorder in identify affection was (15.43±4.63) points; and the score of externally oriented thinking was (13.78±3.77) points. The total score of psychological distress in patients was (5.13±1.62) points, and 67.74% of patients suffered from moderate-severe mental pain. Spearman correlation analysis showed that: patients′ disorder in describing affection and externally oriented thinking were positively correlated with the score of mental sufferings, practical problems, communication problems and emotional problems (r=0.343-0.421; P<0.05). The score of disorder in identify affection was positively related with the score of psychological distress, practical problems, communication problems, emotional problems and mental religion problems (r=0.224-0.502; P<0.05). Conclusions The alexithymia and psychological distress are at a high level in breast cancer patients with chemotherapy, and the alexithymia is closely related to the psychological suffering of patients. Nursing workers should improve the level of alexithymia in patients, thus reducing the psychological suffering of patients. Key words: Breast neoplasms; Chemotherapy; Alexithymia; Psychological distress
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) | 0.001 | 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".