The effectiveness of unified transdiagnostic treatment on psychological distress and alexithymia in people with hypertension comorbid with stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Diseases such as high blood pressure with comorbid psychological problems can make it difficult to manage and control. People with this disease are likely to experience comorbid stresses. Aim: The aim of the present study was the effectiveness of unified transdiagnostic treatment on psychological distress and alexithymia in people with hypertension with comorbid stress. Method: The present study was a semi-experimental type with a control group. 40 patients with high blood pressure with co-occurring stress were selected from health centers of Aliguderz city in 2021 through convenience sampling method. The participants were randomly assigned to the experimental group (20 people) and the control group (20 people). They completed the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Questionnaire (DASS-21, 1995) and the Toronto Ataxia Scale (1994) in two stages: pre-test and post-test. The experimental group received the unified metadiagnostic treatment protocol for 12 sessions of 60 minutes, but the control group did not receive any intervention. The data were analyzed with SPSS-18 and through multivariate analysis of covariance test. Results: The results of covariance analysis showed that unifield transdiagnostic treatment significantly effective in improvement alexithymia (F=56.24, P<0.01) and reducing depression (F=0.65, P<0.01), anxiety (F=8.86, P<0.01) and stress (F=5.43, P<0.01) in the sample of hypertension patients comorbid with stress. Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the unified transdiagnostic treatment affects reducing psychological distress and alexithymia. Therefore, this protocol can be used to improve the psychological problems of these patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".