Relationship of empathy deficits and alexithymia in alcohol dependent patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To investigate alcohol dependent patient' s empathic ability and feeling description ability, and the relationship between empathy deficits and alexithymia. Methods Interpersonal Reactivity Index-C (IRI-C) and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) were used to evaluate 52 alcohol dependent patients (experimental group) and 52 health ones (control group), and their results were compared, respectively.Results The total score of IRI-C for the experimental group was (51.92 ± 9.49), (54.62 ± 5.26) for the control group and there was significant difference between both groups ( t =- 1.79, P ＜ 0. 05 ) ; the total score of TAS-20 for the experimental group was (55.19 ±9.42), (42.46 ± 10.09) for the control group, and there was significant difference between both groups (t =6. 65, P ＜ 0. 01 ). RI-C score in the experimental group was negatively correlated with TAS-20 score (r =-2. 01, P ＜0. 05). Conclusions Empathy deficits and alexithymia prevail in alcohol dependent patients, indicating that strengthening alcohol dependent patient' s ability of emotional expression and understanding plays an important role in promote their social function recovery. Key words: Alcohol related disorder; Empathy deficits; Alexithymia
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".