Trauma-related altered states of consciousness in post-traumatic stress disorder patients with or without comorbid dissociative disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The four-dimensional (‘4-D’) model has been proposed as a theoretical framework to understand and delineate trauma-related dissociative experiences, categorizing symptoms into trauma-related altered states of consciousness (TRASC) and normal waking consciousness (NWC), which occur along four dimensions: time, thought, body and emotion.Objective: The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the validity of this model in patients with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with and without comorbid dissociative disorders.Method: The predictions of the 4-D model were tested in 142 patients with PTSD, with (N = 46) and without (N = 96) comorbid dissociative disorders.Results: As predicted by the 4-D model, experiences of TRASC were less frequent and more specifically related to other measures of dissociation, dissociative disorder comorbidity and a history of childhood sexual abuse compared to experiences of NWC. The predicted lower intercorrelation of TRASC was not supported.Conclusion: The 4-D model represents a promising framework for understanding dissociation across trauma-related disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".