Interpersonal problems in alexithymia: A study in three primary care groups
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The present study investigated the relation between alexithymia and interpersonal problems in a sample of primary care patients with either chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); a chronic cardiovascular or auto-immune disease; or a minor medical condition. It was hypothesized that the relation between cold interpersonal functioning would account for the differences in alexithymia scores between the patient groups. DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants were 155 primary care patients that were recruited through 52 general practitioners: 52 CFS patients; 52 patients with a chronic cardiovascular or auto-immune disease; 51 patients with a minor medical condition. Interpersonal problems were assessed by means of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems and alexithymia was assessed by means of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. RESULTS: CFS patients and patients with a chronic cardiovascular or auto-immune disease have substantially higher alexithymia scores than patients with a minor medical condition. Alexithymia is positively related to cold and distant interpersonal functioning; negatively related to self-sacrificing and overly accommodating in relation to others; and positively related to vindictiveness and self-centredness. The relation between alexithymia and these interpersonal problems accounts for the differences in alexithymia scores between the patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Alexithymia and interpersonal problems should be considered together, in terms of one deficient affect regulatory system, and the relation between alexithymia and specific illness conditions is secondary to this. Clinical assessment of patients with problems in naming and discussing affective states should never be isolated from an examination of their interpersonal problems, and vice versa. Mentalization-based therapy is recommended for patients with problems in naming affective states, interpersonal problems, and concomitant CFS or other alexithymia-related diseases.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".