A naturalistic study of alexithymia among psychiatric outpatients treated in an integrated group therapy program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Alexithymia is common among psychiatric outpatients and can complicate treatment. There has been little research into whether alexithymia can be modified by psychological intervention, and whether change in alexithymia is related to other areas of improvement. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether participation in an integrated group therapy program could effect change in alexithymia, and whether such change is related to improvement in interpersonal functioning. DESIGN AND METHODS: Sixty-eight consecutively admitted psychiatric outpatients to a comprehensive group therapy program were evaluated at baseline, post-therapy, and 3-month follow-up using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale 20, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-28. Associations among variables were evaluated with correlations and among group comparisons with t test, ANOVA, chi-square tests, and logistic regression. Change in alexithymia was examined using repeated measures ANOVA, controlling for change in depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Alexithymia, particularly difficulty identifying feelings, decreased significantly during the treatment period. Post-therapy levels of alexithymia were maintained during the 3 months following treatment completion. Changes in alexithymia were significantly associated with changes in interpersonal problems, both during therapy and during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest that a comprehensive, integrated group therapy program can affect change in alexithymia, and that such change can be maintained once therapy is completed. Also, modifying alexithymia may contribute to improvement in interpersonal functioning.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".