THERAPEUTIC ATTEMPTS IN THE APPROACH OF ALEXITHYMIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary. The study aims to highlight the importance of psychotherapy in the clinical management of patients with psychosomatic alexithymia. Recent research in the psychomedical field concluded that alexithymia presents a risk factor of the psychosocial type, with implications in the appearance of the psychosomatic disorders. This is possible because alexithymic people are unable to fully and properly identify their own emotions and communicate, thus causing a negative emotional tension. Therefore this tension accumulated during negative emotional distress, has a negative reflection in the psychosomatic sphere. Objectives. The objectives set are to increase the capabilities of integrative ego by reducing alexithymia. Methods and materials. They consist in using a cluster of psychotherapeutic techniques of integrative psychotherapy. The techniques role is to help identify their emotions and their verbally externalization, in order to reduce psychological stress. The use of the Toronto alexitymia scale test (TAS) to identify alexithymia in psychosomatic patients is quite helpful in this study. The study was conducted on a sample of 58 people (women and men), in the age range 25-65 years old, with psychosomatic disorders and alexithymia. Results. Study results (shown în graphic) will express differences obtained from Toronto Alexithymia test before and after psychotherapy sessions. Also it will highlight a improved state of mind of the patients who participated in psychotherapy sessions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".