Transcallosal Inhibition in Patients with and without Alexithymia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous results indicated a facilitated transcallosal inhibition via the corpus callosum (CC) in alexithymic male students. This study investigates transcallosal inhibition in alexithymic and nonalexithymic psychiatric inpatients. METHOD: Transcallosal inhibition was elicited by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the primary motor cortex. Seven right-handed male and 12 female psychiatric patients with Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) scores of > or = 61 and 12 patients with TAS-20 scores of < 51 were investigated. The transcallosal conduction time (TCT) reflects the TMS-induced inhibitory cortical activity that is mediated via the CC. RESULTS: There was a significant effect of alexithymia on TCT (Wilks lambda = 0.76; F = 4.1; d.f. = 2, 26; p = 0.027) indicating that alexithymic patients had shorter bidirectional TCTs than nonalexithymic patients. The in-between models showed a significant impact of alexithymia on both right to left TCT (F = 4.8; d.f. = 1; p = 0.038) and left to right TCT (F = 5.0; d.f. = 1; p = 0.033). Neither gender nor scores of depression (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) had any significant effects on TCT. CONCLUSION: Our results confirm and extend the previous findings of a facilitated, bidirectional transcallosal inhibition in alexithymia to male and female psychiatric inpatients. Facilitated transcallosal inhibition should be considered as a neurobiological correlate of alexithymia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".