TAKE ME BACK TO MOVE ME FORWARD: RE-ENACTMENT OF THE FAMILY SYSTEM AS A PATHWAY TO BETTER QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALEXITHYMIC PATIENTS IN GROUP THERAPY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite much attention in the clinical literature, research on alexithymia in the treatment setting has only recently gained traction. While several reports indicate limited benefit from therapy amongst patients with high alexithymia, this seems to be less so in the context of group therapy. This study considers a specific aspect of the group therapy process - family re-enactment - in facilitating improvement in overall quality of life for patients with high levels of alexithymia. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Family re-enactment was examined as a potential mediator of the relationship between alexithymia and change in quality of life among 50 patients who completed treatment in an intensive, integrative group therapy programme. Patients completed three self-report measures: Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (baseline), Quality of Life Inventory (baseline, post-therapy), and Therapeutic Factors Inventory-Short Form (week 8). Regression with mediation analysis was employed using the change score for the QOLI as the dependent variable, alexithymia scores as the independent variable, and the family re-enactment score as the mediator; baseline quality of life was included in the model as a control variable. RESULTS: Family re-enactment emerged as a significant mediator of the relationship between alexithymia and treatment outcome, implicating it as a contributing mechanism of change for alexithymic patients who participate in group therapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with higher levels of alexithymia (in particular, difficulty identifying and describing feelings) were more likely to positively endorse aspects of family re-enactment during group therapy, which in turn were significantly associated with greater improvement in patients' overall quality of life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".