ALEXITHYMIA AND THE ANXIETY FACTOR IN ADOLESCENTS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. To study the level of alexithymia and anxiety in adolescents depending on age and gender, to identify relationships. Materials and methods. A survey of clinically healthy adolescents was carried out using the Toronto alexithymic scale (TAS-26) and the scale of situational and personal anxiety Ch.D. Spielberger – Yu. L. Khanin. Results. Among practically healthy adolescents, over 60% have signs of alexithymia, and half of them are adolescents with a pronounced level of alexithymia. “Vulnerable” for alexithymia are adolescent girls, and by age - younger adolescents. For practically healthy students, the normal level of situational and personal anxiety is natural. With an increase in the symptoms of alexithymia, the presence of high situational and personal anxiety in adolescents is characteristic. A positive correlation was found between the level of alexithymia and the degree of situational (r=0.40; p<0.001; n=507) and personal (r=0.35; p<0.001; n=507) anxiety. Conclusion. Dentification among adolescents of a group of individuals with a risk of developing alexithymia and the presence of signs of alexithymia, with an altered level of situational and personal anxiety, will allow for early prevention and necessary therapeutic interventions.
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) | 0.002 | 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".