Alexithymia and fibromyalgia: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fibromyalgia is a chronic musculoskeletal pain syndrome characterized by the presence of painful points on digito-palpation in anatomical specific areas, called trigger points, followed by psychological disorders like sleeping problems and alexithymia. Alexithymia is a dimension defined as the absence of words for emotions. The patient does not know how to process their own emotions and fail to externalize what feels. The investigation of possible relationship between Fibromyalgia and Alexithymia can increase knowledge about the clinical features resulting from both diseases, especially because alexithymia is poorly explored and has a significant impact in patient’s life quality. Objectives: To execute a literature review searching for a clinical association between Alexithymia and Fibromyalgia (FM), highlighting psychiatric and psychological aspects. Methods: Folowing PRISMA statement the research used Scielo, Pubmed, PsychLit and ISIweb of knowledge data base between 2009 and 2014 with the key-words: “alexithymia”, “fibromyalgia”, “psychosomatics”, “chronical pain”, “psycotherapy”, “psychoanalysis”. Results: Nine studies were selected for analysis which used instruments like the Toronto Alexithymia Scale, the psychoanalysis and cognitive comportamental therapy showing that the patient with Alexithymia and FM has a worse pain interpretation, deals badly with it and suffer the consequences in their physical and mental health due to that. Conclusion: This study suggested the important impact that alexithymia has in patients with FM, since the psychiatric and psychological factors lead to a bigger decrease in life quality of people who have already worse aspects in that, which warn for the importance of this emotional state, since it is under-diagnosed. Due to the fact that there were a small number of reviewed articles, more research about the relation between FM and Alexithymia must be done.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".