Evaluation of Psychological Resilience, Alexithymia, and Impulsivity Characteristics in Persons Who Attempted Suicide with Drugs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective In this study, it was aimed to research the connection between psychological resilience, alexithymia, depression, anxiety and impulsivity in patients who attempted suicide with drugs. Methods The patient group ( n = 66) who attempted suicide with drugs and the control group ( n = 66) without any psychiatric diagnosis were examined in the study. Sociodemographic data form, Psychological Resilience Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Barratt Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11) were used in the study. Results It was found that PRS dedication and challenge are significantly higher in the control group ( p = .039 and p = .003, respectively). When the undiagnosed group who attempted suicide were compared with the control group, it was observed that there is a significant difference between BIS-11 total and TAS total after bonferonni correction (respectively; p = .002; p = .001), while, there is no statistically significant difference in terms of PRS total score ( p = .483) Conclusion It was observed that patients who attempted suicide with drugs had low levels of psychological resilience, high alexithymia levels. In the absence of an additional diagnosis of depression, psychological resilience did not differ in terms of suicide attempts. In the suicide group, those who did not receive any additional diagnosis were not more impulsive than those who were depressed.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".