MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213077434 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.677

Structure of personal disorders in hypertensive disease patients

2021· article· en· W4213077434 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
N. Chernus, Stefan Sivkov, A. Serdakova, A. Sivkov, T. Savina

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaAngerAnxietySomatizationInternal medicineToronto Alexithymia ScaleDepression (economics)AggressionMedicinePsychologyPopulationPsychiatryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The strcuture of personal disorders in hypertensive disease aptients remains relevant topic. Objectives The study population included 57 hypertensive disease patients; mean age 49,1+9,6 years old (42 females and 15 males). The control group included 62 healthy individuals (49 females and 13 males); mean age 48,1+8,6 years old. Methods Emotional condition of subjects was assessed using the Depression Scale of Zung, the Spielberger trait Anger scale and Anxiety, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale and SCL – 90-R Questionnaire. Results The study results showed that as compared to the healthy individuals, the hypertensive disease patients showed significantly higher scores of reactive anxiety (46,0+9,0 and 39,0+8,2; р<0,01), personal anxiety (50,3+9,2 and 41,03+7,9; р<0,01), depression (42,7+7,2 and 36,59+5,95;р<0,01), alexithymia (69,4+8,8 and 59,0+9,2; р<0,01), state anger (11,8+3,6 and 10,6+1,8; р<0,01), reactive anger (9,2+2,6 and 8,1+2,4; р<0,05), personal anger (21,4+5,3 and 18,1+4,6; р<0,01), trait anger (8,3+3,0 and 7,3+2,3; р<0,05), self-aggression (16,2+4,9 and 13,4+3,8; р<0,01), aggression towards others (15,9+3,9 and 14,7+3,4; р<0,05), somatization (1,27+0,6 and 0,5+0,4; р<0,01), hostility (1,2+0,7 and 0,5+0,4; р<0,01), obsessive-compulsive traits (1,2+0,7 и 0,6+0,4; р<0,01), psychoticism (0,7+0,6 and 0,27+0,30; р<0,01) and paranoid traits (1,22+0,6 and 0,5+0,4; р<0,01), phobic anxiety (0,6+0,5 and 0,2+0,2; р<0,01) and interpersonal sensitivity (1,2+0,7 and 0,7+0,5; р<0,01). Conclusions Close interrelations between manifestations of anxiety and depression spectrum disorders and anger may be explained by internal conflict between aggressive impulses and the need for adaptive behavior in such individuals, resulting in consistent vicious vortex.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207