MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043446176 · doi:10.2224/sbp.2005.33.5.495

DISORDERED PERSONALITY TRAITS IN PRIMARY HEADACHES

2005· article· en· W2043446176 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Wang, Tingzhong Yang, Zhu Huanqing, Fuqiang Mao, W. John Livesley, Roseann Larstone, Kerry L. Jang

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Behavior and Personality An International Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMigraine and Headache Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPersonalityHeadachesMigraineAuraBig Five personality traitsClinical psychologyHarm avoidanceTraitDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research has shown an association between primary headaches and some extreme features of normal personality traits, however, studies of the relationship between these headaches and the disordered or abnormal personality traits are still needed. This study sought to examine the disordered personality trait profiles in patients with migraine, tension-type headaches compared to healthy controls. Disordered personality traits were assessed using the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP; Livesley & Jackson, in press), a self-report measure of abnormal personality function that subsumes major models of normal personality, in 41 patients with chronic headaches (CTH), 34 frequent episodic tension-type headaches (FETH) and 48 migraine without aura, as well as 37 headache-free healthy control subjects. All patient groups scored significantly higher than healthy controls on Submissiveness, Cognitive Distortion, Identity Problems, Intimacy Problems, Social Avoidance, and Self-Harm. In addition, the migraine group scored higher on Submissiveness than did the FETH group. Our findings thus confirmed personality dysfunctions in primary headache sufferers.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.309 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Behavior and Personality An International JournalSame topicMigraine and Headache StudiesFrench-language works237,207