MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390528330 · doi:10.6000/1929-6029.2023.12.35

The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Distress Intolerance: Among Panic Buyers in Turkey

2023· article· en· W4390528330 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sevgi Yurt Öncel, Funda Erdugan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressPanicPandemicClinical psychologyFeelingPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychiatryMedicineAnxietySocial psychologyDiseaseInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the factors affecting levels of distress intolerance during the Covid-19 pandemic are statistically analyzed among panic buyers in Turkey. Distress intolerance also increased as health status deteriorates. Construct consistency was achieved in measuring distress intolerance during the Covid-19 period. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed for participants who engage in panic buying behavior. CFA showed that the reliability and consisteny of this scale was ensured. It was seen that enduring uncomfortable emotions was the condition that affected distress intolerance the most. Doing everything to avoid feeling distressed or sad was found to be the least affecting distress intolerance in the Covid-19 period. When all of the fit criteria were considered, it was evident that the proposed model was valid for sample. Consequently, it is recommended that public health services develop health strategies with respect to the stated risk factors and to provide interventions that increase psychological flexibility to reduce Covid-19 related intolerance to distress.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.325 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207