Alexithymia in chronic urticaria patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia has been described as an important dimension in several medical and psychiatric diseases. Chronic urticaria (CU) is a chronic condition, in which treatment is difficult. Our aim is to determine the prevalence of alexithymia traits in patients with CU, and to identify the relationships between alexithymia and psychological variables and quality-of-life dimensions. Fifty-five sequential CU patients in a faculty ambulatory specialized consultation, with an average age of 44.92, were compared with 31 healthy volunteers. Both groups were studied by means of validated scales for alexithymia (Toronto Alexithymia Scale [TAS-20]), attachment (Adult Attachment Scale-R [AAS-R]), psychopathology (Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI]), personality dimensions (The NEO Five-Factor inventory [NEO-FFI]) and quality of life (Short Form-36 [SF-36]). The classification of CU reactions was obtained from the patient's history, physical examination, laboratory assessment and histopathologic findings. All the patients were under treatment with sedating H1-antihistamines, non-sedating H1-antihistamines combination of H1 and H2 blocker, 2 H1-antihistamines and 3 H1-antihistamines. High traits of alexithymia were found on CU patients (56.9%) as well as high symptom rates of anxiety. Alexithymia traits were significantly positively correlated with insecure attachment styles, with psychopathological symptoms, and with the defense mechanism turn against self. We also reported a significant negative correlation between alexithymia traits and the dimensions of quality of life. Insecure attachment styles were positively correlated with psychopathological symptoms and negatively correlated with quality of life. We did not find significant statistical correlations between alexithymia and clinical variables. CU patients present serious difficulty in dealing with emotion arousal. There is strong evidence of a psychosomatic specificity in CU, with marked alexithymic traits.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".