Somatization in Primary Care: A Comparative Survey of Immigrants from Various Ethnic Groups in Rome, Italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Those responsible for interviewing immigrants in primary care settings often underestimate the importance of somatic symptoms arising from psychological distress. This study investigates the current prevalence of somatization in immigrants, and evaluates the comparative rates of somatic complaints in four ethnic groups (Caucasians, Asians, South/Center Americans, and Africans). METHODS: We studied the 301 consecutive outpatients (aged between 16 and 70 years) attending the "Caritas" primary care unit for immigrants in Rome (Italy) from January to December 2003, all of whom completed the 21-item version of the Bradford Somatic Inventory (BSI-21). Patients scoring 14 or more on the BSI-21 were considered at risk for somatization. RESULTS: The current prevalence of somatization was 35.2%; 62.3% of the somatizers were women. A multiple regression analysis adjusting for the possible confounding effects of sex, age, education, and months of stay in Italy showed that South/Central Americans had significantly higher somatization scores than the other three groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest a high probability of somatization syndromes in immigrant patients. South/Central Americans tend to somatize more than other ethnic groups. A psychosomatic approach may be useful for immigrants in primary care settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".