MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2277203693 · doi:10.7282/t3j966nf

Predicting improvement in cognitive behavioral therapy for somatization disorder: the role of alexithymia

2008· article· en· W2277203693 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaSomatizationPsychologyCognitive behavioral therapyCognitionSomatization disorderClinical psychologyCognitive therapyPsychotherapistPsychiatryMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexithymia has been defined as difficulty identifying and expressing emotions and an externally oriented mode of thinking. Previous research has linked alexithymia with somatoform symptoms yet there is little prospective data examining the role of alexithymia in somatization disorder. Thus, changes in alexithymia were examined over the course of a 10-session controlled trial of cognitive behavioral therapy for somatization disorder. It was predicted that the treatment would lead to reductions in alexithymia not seen in the group whose physicians received only a psychiatric consultation letter (PCL) and that CBT participants would score significantly lower on alexithymia than PCL participants. It was also hypothesized that changes in alexithymia from pre- to post-test, assessed through the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), would predict improvement in somatization symptoms, as assessed through the Clinician's Global Impression Scale for Somatization Disorder (CGI-SD) at post-test and at 12-month follow-up. Daily symptom diaries and physical functioning, assessed through the MOS-PF, were also examined as outcomes. Participants were 84 individuals diagnosed with full somatization disorder according to the DSM-IV. Baseline severity and post-treatment mental health, defensiveness, and somatosensory amplification were controlled for in regression analyses. Results partially supported hypotheses. Participants in the CBT condition decreased more in the TAS-20 and the DIF domain and marginally more in the EOT domain over the course of the study than participants in the PCL condition. They differed significantly from PCL participants at post-treatment in the EOT domain but not in the full scale TAS-20 or in any other domains. There were no significant differences between groups in alexithymia at follow-up. Decreases in alexithymia were significantly correlated with improvement in somatization symptoms and greater physical functioning. Although decreases in alexithymia significantly predicted certain outcomes at post-treatment and follow-up over and above control variables, tests for mediation yielded non-significant results. Findings from the current study support emotional functioning as a factor in somatization but do not advance the notion of alexithymia as a mediator of improvement in treatment for somatization disorder. Implications and suggestions for future areas of research are discussed.

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.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.221 · 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