Comparison of premorbid personality and psychopathological structure of some anxiety-affective disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare premorbid personality and structure of psychopathological status of organic anxiety-depressive disorder in comparison with endogenous depression and anxiety neurotic disorders. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and twelve patients, including 57 with organic anxiety-depressive disorder (OADD), 41 with endogenous depression (ED) and 14 with anxiety neurotic disorder (AND) were studied. have been included into the study. The Munich personality test (MPT) and Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS) were used for the evaluation of premorbid personality. Psychopathological structure was assessed with SCL-90. The correlation between premorbid personality and current structure of psychopathological states was studied. RESULTS: OADD patients were characterized by higher scores of frustration tolerance, rigidity and isolation tendency and less expression of neuroticism, esoteric tendencies and motivation compared with ED. In the AND patients, the values of neuroticism and motivation predominated compared with OADD, while the value of frustration tolerance was higher in OADD. A correlation analysis revealed the strong positive relationships of alexithymia, neuroticism and isolation tendency with depression, anxiety, somatization, obsessions and sensitivity in AND group. CONCLUSION: The comparison of correlations between OADD and ED revealed no significant differences. It implies the similarity in the pathogenesis of OADD and ED.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".