MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2727624179 · doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.01.787

Alexithymia, recognition of facial emotion and inference in patients with Eating Disorders (ED) or Substance Abuse Disorders (SAD)

2017· article· en· W2727624179 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eleonora Gambaro, M. J. Varas Lorenzo, Carla Gramaglia, L. Girardi, C. Delicato, S. Gitana, Fabrizio Bert, A. Feggi, Patrizia Zeppegno

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychologyInterpersonal Reactivity IndexClinical psychologyEating disordersPsychopathologyTemperament and Character InventoryToronto Alexithymia ScalePsychiatryEmpathyDevelopmental psychologyTemperamentPersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexythimia is a psychological construct characterized by difficulty describing emotions and distinguishing them from somatic components of the emotional activation. Patients with eating disorders (ED) or substance use disorders (SAD) commonly present also impairment of recognition of facial expressions and deficits in social inference. Patients with ED and SAD may present impulsiveness, difficulty in emotion-focused coping skills, and search for a concrete relief from psychological suffering. The purpose of study is to compare the ED, SAD and healthy controls (HC), in several variables, including Alexythimia, empathy, and ability to recognize emotions, social inference. Thirty-two patients with ED, 27 patients with SAD and 31 HC were recruited between September 2016 and April 2016 at the psychiatric ward of Novara Hospital, nursing home of Nebbiuno and the nursing home of Viverone. We administrated to patients the same battery of tests, composed by Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20), Facial Emotion Identification Test (FEIT), the awareness of Social Inference Test (TASIT), temperament and Character Inventory (TCI), Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), Symptoms Checklist-90 (SCL-90). The two clinical groups showed differences in TAS, FEIT and TASIT, highlighting Alexythimic tracts, difficulty in recognizing emotions and deficit of social inference, compared to HCs. The TCI and SCL-90 have also highlighted the common psychopathological characteristics and temperamental in patients with ED and SAD. Alexythimia is particularly represented in patients with ED and SAD, and could represent a maintenance factor, together with deficits in emotions recognition and social inference. The similarities between ED and TD seem to suggest the possibility of shared core features. 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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207