MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2383051674 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.183

Disorganized attachment and psychological symptoms in children with somatic symptoms disorders

2016· article· en· W2383051674 on OpenAlexaff
Fabiola Bizzi, Sergio Mora, Donatella Cavanna

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal University Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyClinical psychologyDepression (economics)ChecklistChild Behavior ChecklistChild and adolescent psychiatryDeclarationPsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Somatic symptoms disorders (SSD) are one of the most neglected areas in child and adolescent psychiatry (Mohapatra et al., 2014). SSD are characterized by multiple and variable physical symptoms without demonstrable pathophysiological processes. Literature has investigated the role of several psychological variables in SSD, with inconclusive data. Moreover, there is a paucity of studies on middle-childhood and early adolescence in this clinical condition. Objectives We focus on the role of attachment and on psychological aspects in children with SSD. Aims The aims are to verify the presence of: – an overrepresentation of attachment disorganization in these children; – an overrepresentation of psychological symptoms. Methods Fifty-six consecutive Italian patients with SSD, aged from 8 to 15, were administered Child Behavior Checklist (Achenbach, 1991) and Child Attachment Interview (Shmueli-Goetz et al., 2000). Results Findings showed: – a significant presence of disorganized attachment with respect to both parents; – high levels of anxiety and depression. Conclusion This study extended previous research in middle-childhood and early adolescence in SSD. The findings support the influence of the disorganization aspects and the psychological problems surrounding the SSD. The clinical implications for future research directions are discussed. 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 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Psychiatry→Same topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research→French-language works237,207→