Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between depression, alexithymia, social support and somatic symptom in adolescents. Methods: The subjects were 1,519 adolescents in Seoul. Radloff's CES-D (The Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression scale) for depression, Bagby, Parker and Taylor's TAS (Toronto Alexithymia Scale) for alexithymia, Park's social support and Derogatis's SCL-90 (Brief Symptom Inventory & Matching Clinical Rating Scale) were used. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, Pearson's correlation coefficients, t or F test, and stepwise multiple regression. Results: Depression and somatic symptom were lower but social support was higher when compared to mean score. The somatic symptom was significantly positive correlations to age, depression, alexithymia but no correlation to social support. Stepwise multiple regression analysis showed that 21.8% of the somatic symptom was significantly accounted for depression, alexithymia, social support, gender, economic status, living alone, and living with parent. Conclusion: These results suggest that depression, alexithymia, living alone can be potential risk factors for somatic symptom in the adolescents. Therefore, these findings will give useful information for developing a promotion program focused on social support in the adolescents.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".