MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Impact of anxiety levels and alexithymia degree on the quality of life in patients with anxiety disorders

2024· article· en· W6948092200 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaAnxietyPanic disorderQuality of life (healthcare)Toronto Alexithymia ScaleDepression (economics)Anxiety disorderCorrelation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective·To evaluate the relationship between anxiety level, alexithymia degree and quality of life in patients with anxiety disorders.Methods·Anxiety disorder patients admitted to the outpatient department of Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from October 1, 2020 to March 31, 2023 were selected as the research subjects, and 438 patients were ultimately included after exclusion. Among them, there were 271 patients with generalized anxiety disorder, 101 patients with panic disorder, 48 patients with social anxiety disorder, 12 patients with agoraphobia, and 6 patients with specific phobia. Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA), Hamilton Depression Scale-17 (HAMD-17), the twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale-Brief Form Questionnaire (WHOQOL-BREF) were used to assess the patients' anxiety level, depression level, alexithymia degree and quality of life, respectively, and the scale scores of patients with different subtypes of anxiety disorders were evaluated. Spearman correlation coefficient was used to analyze the correlation between anxiety level, depression level, alexithymia degree and quality of life in patients with anxiety disorders. Stepwise regression model was used to analyze the key variables affecting the quality of life in patients with anxiety disorders.Results·There were no significant differences in HAMA score, HAMD-17 score and TAS-20 score among patients with different subtypes of anxiety disorders, but the differences in WHOQOL-BRIEF score were statistically significant (H=10.076, P=0.039). The results of Spearman correlation analysis showed that the WHOQOL-BRIEF score of anxiety disorder patients was negatively correlated with HAMA score, HAMD-17 score and TAS-20 score (r=-0.256, P=0.000; r=-0.311, P=0.000; r=-0.342, P=0.000). The results of stepwise regression analysis showed that age, HAMA score, HAMD-17 score and TAS-20 score had significant impact on the quality of life of patients (all P<0.05).Conclusion·The quality of life in patients with different subtypes of anxiety disorders is different. The anxiety level, depression level and alexithymia degree are the key variables affecting their quality of life.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments→French-language works237,207→