Gender-related psychosomatic peculiarities of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The problem of specificity of psychological adaptation mechanisms at the patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is extremely actual. The aim is to investigate gender psychological characteristics associated with T2DM Objectives In the comparative study 62 patients (28 male, 34 female; mean age 56,8±2,3 and 55,4±2,7 yrs.) with T2DM (HbA1c 7,3±1,3%) and visceral obesity (Grade 2) were included. Methods Research methods: the Depression Scale of Zung, the Spielberger trait scale anxiety, Toronto Alexithymia Scale and MMPI test Results T2DM-female-patients in comparison with T2DM-male showed significantly higher personal anxiety scores (51,2+7,6 and 44,1+10,6 respectively; р<0,05), depression scores (44,2+7,6 and 36,7+8,4 respectively; р<0,05), while alexithymia scores were higher at T2DM-males (68,2+9,6 and 71,7+6,4 respectively; p<0,05). In MMPI test (after correction by K-scale) 46,8% of patients demonstrated profiles with elevated scale 1 score (above 70 Т-scores, but below 80 Т-scores) regardless of gender differences. However, the T-scores for T2DM-male patients were on the average by 1,07 higher than for T2DM-female (58,4 vs 54,4 respectively, р˃0,05), that indicated more higher concern related to own physical health condition. The female T2DM-patients significantly more often demonstrated profiles with scale 6 peak (exceeding 65 Т-scores): 79,4% vs. 21,4%, which indicated the more higher accentuation of personality traits (concealed hostility; protest; rigidity, desire to blame the others for one’s failure, et cetera) Conclusions The patient’s gender has to be taken into consideration at development of clinical, diagnostic and prevention activities of patients with T2DM and visceral obesity.
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".