Alexitimia, estrés percibido y estrategias de afrontamiento al estrés en adultos responsables de la canasta familiar durante el contexto de la pandemia por Covid-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El presente estudio es de enfoque cuantitativo de alcance correlacional, tiene como objetivo establecer la relación que existe entre la alexitimia, el estrés percibido y las estrategias de afrontamiento al estrés en adultos responsables de la canasta familiar durante el contexto de la pandemia por Covid-19. El diseño es no experimental de tipo transversal. La muestra lo conformaron 227 personas mayores de 18 años que son el soporte económico de su familia. Los instrumentos utilizados para la recolección de los datos fueron la Escala de Alexitimia de Toronto (TAS-20), la Escala de Estrés Percibido (EEP-14) y el Cuestionario breve de modos de afrontamiento al estrés (COPE-28). Se encontró altos niveles de alexitimia en la población, al igual que estrés y mayoritariamente hacen uso de estrategias de afrontamiento al estrés enfocados en el problema. También, se halló una relación significativa entre las variables de estudio.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".