Family Functioning in Subjects with Pseudoseizures and Epilepsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to identify differences in family functioning between subjects with pseudoseizures and their families, and control subjects with epilepsy. Thirty-one adult subjects with pseudoseizures and 31 controls with intractable epilepsy, whose diagnoses were confirmed using video-EEG, were recruited from the epilepsy unit of a tertiary care hospital over a 4-year period. Each study participant and their first-degree adult family members completed two standardized questionnaires designed to measure family functioning: the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD) and the Beavers Self-Report Family Inventory (SFI). Individuals with pseudoseizures, when compared with epileptic subjects, exhibited significantly elevated scores in three scales of the FAD and in one scale of the SFI, indicating greater psychopathology within the family, as perceived by the individual. Statistically significant differences with the FAD were on measures of affective involvement (p = .044), communication (p = .004), and general functioning (p = .013). The SFI revealed significantly greater difficulty with conflict (p = .050). No differences were noted between subjects with both pseudoseizures and epilepsy and subjects with pseudoseizures alone. In comparison with the families of the epileptic group, the families of subjects with pseudoseizures displayed statistically significant elevations in their responses on the roles scale (p = .003) of the FAD. The responses of the family members did not differ in regard to the role they assumed within the family unit (i.e., spouse, parent). In summary, individuals with pseudoseizures view their families as being more dysfunctional, particularly in the area of communication, whereas their family members perceived difficulties in defining roles. This suggests that family education and interventions focusing on these areas, may be an important aspect of the treatment of patients with pseudoseizures.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".