Može li Torontska skala aleksitimije (TAS-20) izmjeriti aleksitimiju odraslih i adolescenata?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20 (TAS-20) najcesce je koristen instrument za procjenu aleksitimije u istraživanjima, epidemioloskim studijama i klinickoj praksi. Glavni ciljevi ovoga rada bili su (a) evaluacija upotrebljivosti TAS-20 za dijagnozu aleksitimije odraslih osoba (cemu je i namijenjena) i (b) ocjena mogucnosti upotrebe ove skale za istu svrhu kod adolescenata, u cemu do sada nije bilo nikakvih iskustava. Odgovor na prvo pitanje dobiven je kritickim pregledom dosadasnjih istraživanja i sistematiziranih iskustava. Pokazalo se da neke konceptualne poteskoce i s njima povezane odluke pri finaliziranju skale imaju znacajan utjecaj na reprezentativnost njezinog sadržaja i pouzdanost rezultata sto bitno umanjuje dijagnosticku vrijednost instrumenta. Analiza vlastitih podataka dobivenih primjenom TAS-20 na N=269 srednjoskolaca potvrdila je nedostatke uocene u ranijim istraživanjima koji su u ovoj populaciji jos vise dosli do izražaja. Također se pokazalo da je izraženost aleksitimije kod adolescenata vrlo visoka i strukturirana tako da je moguce pretpostaviti postojanje specificne sekundarne aleksitimije, karakteristicne za promatrani životni period. Zbog krupnih konceptualnih i izvedbenih ogranicenja zakljuceno je da se TAS-20 ne može bezuvjetno preporuciti za dijagnozu aleksitimije te je sugerirana njezina temeljita revizija koja bi trebala omoguciti bolje opisivanje sindroma ali i podrobnija istraživanja njegove prirode (i) u adolescentskoj populaciji.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".