Alexithymia and asthma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Alexithymia refers to difficulties in verbal expression of emotions, commonly observed in patients with psychosomatic symptoms. In this context, asthma is described as one of psychosomatic diseases. Objectives Identify clinical profile of asthmatic patients and assess the alexithymia level as well as associated factors. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, descriptive and analytic study, including 30 patients followed for asthma at pulmonary outpatient department, Hedi Chaker Hospital, Sfax, Tunisia, during September and October 2015. We collected socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Asthma control level was assessed by the Asthma Control Test (ACT). Alexithymia was measured using Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS 20). Results The mean age was 51 ans. Sex-ratio F/M was 14. The mean duration of disease was 11 years. Long-term control medicines were: inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta agonists and theophylline respectively in 86.7%, 33.3% and 26.7%. Two thirds of our patients had a bad therapeutic adherence. The average ACT score was 16.8 points. Asthma was uncontrolled in 1/3 and well controlled in 1/3 of cases. The average TAS 20 score was 64.8 points. Twenty percent of patients were non-alexithymic, 13.3% had a probable alexithymia and 66.7% were alexithymic. This score was positively correlated to bad asthma control (P < 0.001), long term evolution (P = 0.002) and use of inhaled corticoids (P < 0.001). It was inversely correlated to ACT score (P < 0.001). Conclusion Our study shows the high prevalence of alexithymia in patients with asthma and its negative impact in asthma control. Psychological support aiming specifically alexithymic dimension in these patients is indispensable. Disclosure of interest The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".