Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to compare alexithymia, anxiety and perceived stress in patients with irritable bowel syndrome and healthy individuals.This study used a causal-comparative research design.The study population consisted of all male and female patients referred to the treatment centers in Tabriz, Iran, during the second six months of 2016.Among the patients who met the inclusion criteria, 50 subjects were selected using purposeful sampling.In addition, a sample of general population (N= 50) was selected for comparison with healthy individuals.After describing the procedures and purposes of the study, written informed consents were obtained.Each subject was asked to complete Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), and Perceived Stress Scale (PSS).Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance.The results revealed a significant difference between the mean scores of alexithymia, anxiety and perceived stress in the experimental groups compared with healthy subjects.Given the scientific evidence for the role of psychological factors in developing, intensifying or reducing irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) symptoms, it seems that not all the therapeutic strategies for these patients can be successfully implemented without regard to the mediating role of these factors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.841 | 0.741 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".