Correlates of alexithymia and its relationship with Kratom ( <i>Mitragyna speciosa</i> ) use in a cohort of male methamphetamine users in Malaysia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Alexithymia is a typical clinical manifestation of prolonged methamphetamine use and risk transdiagnostic factor for emotion-based psychiatric disorders. Kratom (Mitragyna speciosa) co-consumption is becoming prevalent among methamphetamine users in Southeast Asia. Given its therapeutic value in mitigating mood disorders, it was hypothesized that methamphetamine users self-manage alexithymia effects with kratom.Methods A total of 367 male methamphetamine users with and without kratom use history participated in this cross-sectional study. Validated scales encompassing the Malay version of the Kratom Dependence Scale (KDS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were administered.Results The level of alexithymia in methamphetamine users with kratom use history did not differ significantly from methamphetamine users without kratom use history. Similarly, among methamphetamine users with kratom use history, their alexithymia level did not contrast significantly across groups based on their duration (short vs. long-term) of methamphetamine and kratom use history. Indeed, only current age, age of first illicit drug use history, and anxiety were predictors for alexithymia level in methamphetamine users with kratom use history.Conclusions Kratom consumption cannot significantly predict alexithymia level. Its regular use did not appear to alleviate alexithymia in methamphetamine users.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".