MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134329781 · doi:10.1081/ja-120030058

Alexithymia, Depressive Experiences, and Dependency in Addictive Disorders

2004· article· en· W2134329781 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mario Speranza, Maurice Corcos, Philippe Stéphan, Gwenolé Loas, Fernando Pérez-Díaz, François Lang, Jean Luc Venisse, Paul Bizouard, Martine F. Flament, Olivier Halfon, Philippe Jeammet

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychologyAddictionToronto Alexithymia ScaleClinical psychologyPsychiatryAlcohol dependenceMajor depressive disorderAlcohol use disorderAlcoholMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexithymia, depressive feelings, and dependency are interrelated dimensions that are considered potential "risk factors" for addictive disorders. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between these dimensions and to define a comprehensive model of addiction in a large sample of addicted subjects, whether affected by an eating disorder or presenting an alcohol- or a drug use-related disorder. The participants in this study were gathered from a multicenter collaborative study on addictive behaviors conducted in several psychiatric departments in France, Switzerland, and Belgium between January 1995 and March 1999. The clinical sample was composed of 564 patients (149 anorexics, 84 bulimics, 208 alcoholics, 123 drug addicts) of both genders with a mean age of 27.3 +/- 8 years. A path analysis was conducted on the 564 dependent patients and 518 matched controls using the scores of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the Depressive Experiences Questionnaire, and the Interpersonal Dependency Inventory. Statistical analyses showed good adjustment (Goodness of Fit Index = 0.977) between the observable data and the assumed model, thus supporting the hypothesis that a depressive dimension, whether anaclitic or self-critical, can facilitate the development of dependency in vulnerable alexithymic subjects. This result has interesting clinical implications because identifying specific patterns of relationships leading from alexithymia to dependency can provide clues to the development of targeted strategies for at-risk subjects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations75
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use & MisuseSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207