Evaluation of depression, anxiety, alexithymia, attachment, social support and somatization in functional dyspepsia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The psychiatric and psychosocial aetiology of Functional dyspepsia is not well known. In the present study, our aim is to determine the relative contributions of psychiatric predictors – i.e. depression, anxiety, somatization, alexithymia – in relation with socio-psychological factors, specifically their personal characteristics (i.e. emotional attachment) and perceived social support, in distinguishing FD from organic dyspepsia and healthy samples.MATERIAL AND METHODS: An estimated 30 functional dyspepsia, 29 organic dyspepsia patients who were admitted to our gastroenterology outpatient clinic and 27 healthy controls were enrolled to our study. Beck Depression Inventory, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Adult Attachment Scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support and somatization sub-scale of Symptom Checklist-90 were provided to all patients and healthy controls. All participants were examined by a gastroenterologist and a psychiatrist.RESULTS: Healthy controls were younger than organic dyspepsia group and women/men rate was lower in organic dyspepsia than other two groups. Depression score was higher in functional dyspepsia group than in healthy controls and functional dyspepsia group’s attachment syle was more secure than that of the healthy control group. Somatization rate was seen higher in functional dyspepsia group with psychiatric examination. There was no significant difference seen in anxiety, alexithymia and social support between the three groups.DISCUSSION: Anxious-avoidant attachment profile as well as the higher propensity to have depressive and anxiety symptoms might be critical psychiatric and psychosocial factors underlying FD’s aetiology. A multidisciplinary approach is needed in the follow up of functional dyspepsia patients. Psychological evaluation and treatment would increase the life quality of dyspepsia patients.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".