Alexitimia en personas en procesos de separación o divorcio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objetivos: Estudiar la dimension como variable en personas inmersas en un proceso legal de separacion o divorcio. Material y Metodos: Escala de Alexitimia de Toronto de 20 elementos (TAS-20) y Escala de Ansiedad de Hamilton (HARS) aplicadas a 32 clientes de un bufete. Media (X), desviacion tipica (DT), porcentaje de positivos (%),prueba de Kolmogorov-Smirnov pruebas t de Student con p menor de O.05 e indice r de correlacion lineal de Pearson. Resultados: el nivel de alexitimia de los clientes se distribuye segun una variable de distribucion normal N con X=65.22 y DT=8.93 y su media es estadisticamente superior al de la poblacion general con un 68% de casos positivos. No aparecen diferencias significativas entre mujeres y varones. La alexitimia y la ansiedad clinica muestran relacion directa y positiva, r=+0.66. Conclusion: El proceso de separacion o divorcio incrementa la alexitimia y la ansiedad reactiva. Dichos datos pueden ser muy utiles en la determinacion del alcance y la magnitud de la desviacion sexual en el perfil inicial de riesgo de reincidencia y en la planificacion de la intervencion especializada.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".