MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904287112 · doi:10.5455/nys.20180830051746

Associations between Somatization Symptoms, Ability of Reading Mind in the Eyes and Alexithymia in Adolescents

2018· article· en· W2904287112 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mesut Yavuz

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Investigation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaSomatizationPsychologyReading (process)Cognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyAnxietyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To investigate the relationships between somatization, the ability of reading mind in the eyes, alexithymia, and associated mental problems in adolescents. Method: 817 adolescents aged between 13 and 17 (60 % girls, n=490) were included. DSM-5 level 2 somatic symptom scale child form, 20 item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), child form of reading the mind in the eyes test (eyes test) and Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) were applied to participants. The scale scores of male and female groups were compared with independent sample t test. The correlations between the TAS-20, eyes test total scores, and SDQ total and subscale scores were evaluated with Pearson-product moment corelation test. The predictability of eyes test, TAS-20, SDQ problem scores, and age on somatization were tested with multivariate linear regression analysis. Results: The somatization scores of females were higher than males, significantly. There were significant correlations between the somatization scores, and TAS-20, SDQ emotional problems, inattention/hyperactivity, conduct problems, and peer relation problems subscale scores. Regression analysis indicated that TAS-20, SDQ emotional problems, inattention/hyperactivity, peer relation problems subscale scores and age significantly predict the somatization scores. There was not a statistically significant relationship between the somatization and eyes test scores. Conclusion: Therapeutic interventions focusing on problems about identifying, describing and expressing the emotions which are the essential characteristics of alexithymia may be effective in adolescents with alexithymic personality traits and somatization problems. Focusing on the associated emotional and behavioral problems in somatization may improve the success of the treatment. Further studies are needed to improve our knowledge about the relationship between the somatization and the abilities of reading mind in the eyes.

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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric InvestigationSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207