Externally oriented thinking style increases primary health care use in adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alexithymia has been related to adult health care use. We investigated the association between alexithymia and the utilization of primary health care services by adolescents and young adults. METHODS: The participants (n = 751, aged 13-18 years) in this 5-year follow-up study were assessed with the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and its three subscales, difficulty identifying feelings (DIF), difficulty describing feelings (DDF) and externally oriented thinking (EOT), and the 21-item Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Primary health care data were gathered from health care centre registers in 2005-10. Generalized linear models and mediation analyses were used. RESULTS: An increase in the TAS-20 total score correlated with a higher number of primary health care and emergency care visits, but in multivariate general linear models, TAS-20 total scores were no longer significant. Younger age, female gender and an increase in the baseline EOT score are associated with a higher number of both primary health care and emergency room visits. In females, a smaller change in the EOT score from baseline to follow-up was associated with a higher number of primary health care visits. In mediation analyses, EOT had a direct effect on a higher number of primary health care and emergency room visits, whereas the BDI score mediated the incremental effect of DIF and DDF on visit numbers. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that an EOT style independently increases health care use by adolescents, whereas the effects of difficulties identifying and describing feelings on health care use are mediated by symptoms of depression.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".