MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383665034 · doi:10.5812/ijpbs-128433

Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Alexithymia, and Defense Mechanisms Among Medical Students of Northeastern Iran

2023· article· en· W4383665034 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hossein Aryan, Farhad Farıdhosseını, Morteza Modares Gharavi, Tanin Tamiztousi, Maliheh Ziaee

Bibliographic record

VenueIranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaNeuroticismClinical psychologyPsychologyGeneralized anxiety disorderAnxietyToronto Alexithymia ScaleSomatizationPsychiatryPersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Defense mechanisms are essential to personality and behavior that help individuals deal with stress. These mechanisms might act in different ways, rendering medical students caring physicians or egoistic individuals, and thus, a good understanding of defense mechanisms can contribute to the efforts made to improve the psychological well-being of medical students. Objectives: We studied the prevalence of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and alexithymia as determinants of psychological well-being and the mechanisms by which medical students might cope with stress and anxiety. Methods: The present cross-sectional study was conducted on 232 medical students, 126 (60%) females and 96 (40%) males, in northeast Iran. Data were collected through GAD-7, the Farsi version of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (FTAS-20), and the Defense Styles Questionnaire (DSQ-40). Statistical analysis was performed with IBM SPSS 22.0. Pearson's chi-square test, bivariate correlations, and multiple linear regression analysis were used to identify associations between GAD, alexithymia, and defense mechanisms. Results: A total of 87 (37.5%) participants showed moderate to severe anxiety. Alexithymia was detected in 49 (21%) participants. Mature defense mechanisms had the highest prevalence among participants (56.5%), while immature mechanisms had the least (23.3%). A significant positive correlation was noted between GAD and alexithymia. Also, GAD was positively correlated with immature and neurotic defense mechanisms (P < 0.05). A negative correlation was found between mature defense mechanisms and GAD (P < 0.001). Suppression and humor (mature mechanisms) were the negative predictors of GAD. Reaction formation, somatization, autistic fantasy, splitting, passive aggression, displacement, and pseudo-altruism (an immature and neurotic mechanism) were the positive predictors of GAD. Conclusions: The statistically significant correlations found among GAD, alexithymia, and defense mechanisms suggest that a good understanding of these conditions and mechanisms can contribute to alleviating anxiety among medical students and improving their psychological well-being.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIranian Journal of Psychiatry and Behavioral SciencesSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207