Executive function impairments in fibromyalgia syndrome: Relevance of clinical variables and body mass index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several investigations suggest the presence of deterioration of executive function in fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS). The study quantified executive functions in patients with FMS. A wide array of functions was assessed, including updating, shifting and inhibition, as well as decision making and mental planning. Moreover, clinical variables were investigated as possible mediators of executive dysfunction, including pain severity, psychiatric comorbidity, medication and body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Fifty-two FMS patients and 32 healthy controls completed a battery of 14 neuropsychological tests. Clinical interviews were conducted and the McGill Pain Questionnaire, Beck Depression Inventory, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Fatigue Severity Scale and Oviedo Quality of Sleep Questionnaire were presented. RESULTS: Patients performed poorer than controls on the Letter Number Sequencing, Arithmetic and Similarities subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, the Spatial Span subtest of the Wechsler Memory Scale, an N-back task, a verbal fluency task, the Ruff Figural Fluency Test, the Inhibition score of the Stroop Test, the Inhibition and Shifting scores of the Five Digits Test, the Key Search Test and the Zoo Map Task. Moreover, patients exhibited less steep learning curves on the Iowa Gambling Task. Among clinical variables, BMI and pain severity explained the largest proportion of performance variance. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated impairments in executive functions of updating, shifting inhibition, decision making and planning in FMS. While the mediating role of pain in cognitive impairments in FMS had been previously established, the influence of BMI is a novel finding. Overweight and obesity should be considered by FMS researchers, and in the treatment of the condition.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".