MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791126217 · doi:10.1111/papt.12180

Relations of mindfulness facets with psychological symptoms among individuals with a diagnosis of obsessive–compulsive disorder, major depressive disorder, or borderline personality disorder

2018· article· en· W2791126217 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fabrizio Didonna, Roberta Rossi, Clarissa Ferrari, Luca Iani, Laura Pedrini, Nicoletta Rossi, Erica Xodo, Mariangela Lanfredi

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaMindfulnessClinical psychologyPsychologyBeck Depression InventoryPsychopathologyMajor depressive disorderToronto Alexithymia ScaleBorderline personality disorderPsychological interventionDissociative Experiences ScalePsychiatryAnxietyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To explore differences in mindfulness facets among patients with a diagnosis of either obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), major depressive disorder (MDD), or borderline personality disorder (BPD), and healthy controls (HC), and their associations with clinical features. DESIGN AND METHOD: One hundred and fifty-three patients and 50 HC underwent a clinical assessment including measures of mindfulness (Five Facets Mindfulness Questionnaire - FFMQ), psychopathological symptoms (Symptom Check List-90-R), dissociation (Dissociative Experience Scale), alexithymia (Alexithymia Scale 20), and depression (Beck Depression Inventory-II). Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) were performed to assess differences in mindfulness scores and their associations with clinical features. RESULTS: The three diagnostic groups scored lower on all mindfulness facets (apart from FFMQobserving) compared to the HC group. OCD group had a significant higher FFMQ total score (FFMQ-TS) and FFMQacting with awareness compared to the BPD group, and scored higher on FFMQdescribing compared to BPD and MDD groups. The scores in non-judging facet were significantly lower in all the three diagnostic groups compared to the HC group. Interestingly, higher FFMQ-TS was inversely related to all psychological measures, regardless of diagnostic group. CONCLUSIONS: Deficits in mindfulness skills were present in all diagnostic groups. Furthermore, we found disease-specific relationships between some mindfulness facets and specific psychological variables. Clinical implications are discussed. PRACTITIONER POINTS: The study showed deficits in mindfulness scores in all diagnostic groups compared to a healthy control group. Overall, mindfulness construct has a significantly negative association with indexes of global distress, dissociative symptoms, alexithymia, and depression. Mindfulness-based interventions in clinical settings should take into account different patterns of mindfulness skills and their impact on disease-specific maladaptive cognitive strategies or symptomatology.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations35
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and Psychotherapy Theory Research and PracticeSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207