MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031600898 · doi:10.1159/000330261

Alexithymia and Severe Psychopathology: A Study on Psychiatric Inpatients

2012· article· en· W2031600898 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychopathology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScalePsychopathologyBrief Psychiatric Rating ScalePsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Rating scalePsychosisDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The influence of severe psychopathology on alexithymic features has been poorly studied. This study aimed at investigating whether alexithymia is affected by the presence of psychosis and the severity of psychopathology. SAMPLING AND METHODS: 199 consecutive adult psychiatric inpatients, 60 of whom received a Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I diagnosis of psychotic disorder, were administered the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). A random sample of 50 patients was reassessed at discharge. For all analyses, the Holm-Bonferroni correction was applied when appropriate to account for multiple testing. RESULTS: The TAS-20 showed good internal consistency, acceptable relative stability, and good absolute stability both in patients with and without a psychotic disorder. Internal consistency and relative stability were higher in nonpsychotic than in psychotic patients. Mean TAS-20 score at admission did not differ between psychotic and nonpsychotic patients, and the TAS-20 score showed only a nonsignificant correlation (rho = 0.26) with BPRS score. Alexithymia at discharge was mostly explained (60%) by alexithymia at admission, while it was only modestly explained (4%) by BPRS scores at admission and discharge, with the latter being the only significant predictor. Changes in BPRS scores between admission and discharge explained a nonsignificant proportion (16%) of changes in TAS-20 scores and a moderate (21%) proportion of changes in difficulty identifying feelings. CONCLUSION: Despite some limitations, these findings suggest that the severity of psychopathology and the presence of a psychotic disorder only modestly influence alexithymic characteristics, and that the TAS-20 may provide a reliable assessment of alexithymia in patients with severe psychopathology, except the most severely impaired ones.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it