MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206961147 · doi:10.7860/jcdr/2021/51358.15549

Alexithymia in Children with Traumatic Dental Injuries- A Cross-sectional Study

2021· article· en· W4206961147 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sweta Singh, Priyanka Talmale, prerna waghmare, Tejaswini Dongre, Rizwan Mokashi, ashada chavan

Bibliographic record

VenueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleMedicineClinical psychologyPersonalityAffect (linguistics)FeelingCross-sectional studyPsychiatryPsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Alexithymia is a personality trait that affects the emotional regulation. It has been found associated especially with pain disorders. It is a personality construct which is characterised by inability to experience and describe feelings, making an alexithymia patient suffer from mental clouding. Therefore, it is important to diagnose patients with alexithymia in dental clinics since it may adversely affect the doctor patient relationship and treatment outcome. Aim: To find the prevalence of alexithymia and to find any difference in alexithymia traits between children with Traumatic Dental Injury (TDI) and those without it. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted on 10-19 years old adolescents reporting to K.M. Shah Dental College and Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth (Deemed to be University), Vadodara, Gujarat, India, from February 2018 to September 2018. A total of 420 participants were enrolled with 210 in each group (with TDI and without TDI). Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) was used to identify alexithymia. Andreasen’s classification for TDI was used to classify the TDI. Chi-square was used to compare the non parametric data between the groups. Unpaired t-test was performed for the comparison of scores between groups for total TAS-20 score and as well as for the nine dimensions. Results: The prevalence of alexithymia was found to be 86.1% in children with TDI compared to 30.9% in children without TDI. The difference in prevalence of alexithymia between children with TDI and those without was statistically significant (p-value=0.0001). Children with TDI reported with significantly higher total TAS scores. However, difference with respect to gender was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The prevalence of alexithymia was found significantly higher in children with TDI. Also, the TAS-20 score and the individual domain scores were higher in children with TDI. Hence, alexithymia may be associated with TDI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.128
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.374 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCHSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207