Alexitimia y autolesiones en adolescentes de una institución educativa privada de Chiclayo, 2024
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La presente investigación, creada bajo el tercer objetivo de desarrollo sostenible, el cual es garantizar una vida sana y promover el bienestar de todos a todas las edades, nace con la finalidad de buscar la relación entre la alexitimia y las autolesiones en adolescentes de una institución educativa privada de Chiclayo, 2024. La presente se trabajó bajo una metodología de tipo básico, con un enfoque cualitativo, de diseño transversal, no experimental y correlacional y empleó una muestra de 100 alumnos a quienes se les evaluó con la Escala de Alexitimia de Toronto (TAS-20), y la Escala de Conductas Autolesivas. Los resultados encontrados determinaron que no que no existe relación entre ambas variables (Rho; -0.039; Sig Bilateral = 0.699). además, se aprecia que el 100% de los encuestados manifiesta un alto nivel de alexitimia; mientras que el 70% de los encuestados manifiestan un nivel moderado de autolesiones, seguido de un nivel alto con 30%. Se concluye que la alexitimia no es un factor predictor significativo de las autolesiones.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".