Body Image Disturbance, Parental Bonding and Alexithymia in Patients with Eating Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To evaluate if body image disturbance and alexithymia, two major clinical features of eating disorders (ED), are predicted by an altered parental bonding. SAMPLING AND METHODS: 64 female ED outpatients and 68 female healthy controls were assessed by means of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI), the Body Uneasiness Test (BUT), and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Pearson's correlations and multiple stepwise regression analysis were applied to explore the contribution of PBI factors on BUT and TAS scores. RESULTS: BUT weight phobia, body image concerns, avoidance, depersonalization, Global Severity Index and positive symptom total were predicted by low parental care, while compulsive self-monitoring was predicted by parental overprotection. TAS total score and difficulty in describing feelings were predicted by low maternal care. CONCLUSIONS: Body image disturbance in ED may be conceptualized as a deficit in self-development, resulting from failures in parent-child interactions which impaired the ability to distinguish bodily needs from emotional experiences.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".