MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386474007 · doi:10.33921/jhyb1960

The role of emotional distress tolerance in the development of major depressive disorder in university students

2021· article· en· W4386474007 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marie-Ève Cadieux, Mélissandre Leblanc, Catherine Bourgeois, Pascale Vézina-Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interpersonal Relations Intergroup Relations and Identity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderPsychologyDistressEmotional distressContext (archaeology)Depression (economics)PopulationClinical psychologyPsychiatryMedicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

University students represent the most affected population regarding major depression disorder (MDD). Following the diatesis-thesis model, the interaction between environmental stress and the presence of preexisting vulnerabilities would explain its development. Besides, researchers studied tolerance for emotional distress (TED) and its influence on the development of multiple psychopathologies. However, no study seems to have looked at the potential influence of TED on MDD development in university students. Therefore, the following article has two aims. Firstly, it proposes a theoretical model where TED would be a moderating variable between environmental stress and MDD development in university students. Secondly, based on the proposed model, a prevention method for MDD will be suggested. This study allows a better understanding of MDD development in the university context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interpersonal Relations Intergroup Relations and IdentitySame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207