Insula Activity to Visceral Stimulation and Endocrine Stress Responses as Associated With Alexithymia in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Few studies have investigated associations between alexithymia and physiological mechanisms in psychosomatic diseases. We examined associations between alexithymia and 1) perception and brain processing of visceral stimulation and 2) the endocrine responses to corticotrophin-releasing hormone (CRH) in healthy individuals and patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). METHODS: The study included 29 patients with IBS and 35 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HCs). Alexithymia was measured using the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). Brain responses to rectal distention and its anticipation were measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging and analyzed at a voxel-level threshold of puncorrected < .001 combined with a cluster-level threshold of pFWE-corrected < .05. On a different day, plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone and cortisol responses after intravenous CRH administration were measured. RESULTS: TAS-20 scores did not differ significantly between patients with IBS and HCs (p = .18). TAS-20 scores correlated positively with the individual rectal discomfort thresholds (βrobust = 0.49, p = .03) and negatively with the rating of fear before rectal distention (βrobust = -1.63, p = .04) in patients with IBS but not in HCs. Brain responses to rectal distention in the right insula and other brain regions were positively associated with TAS-20 scores to a greater extent in patients with IBS than in HCs. Individuals with higher TAS-20 scores (both patients with IBS and HCs) demonstrated stronger adrenocorticotropic hormone responses to CRH administration (F(4,224) = 3.54, p = .008). CONCLUSION: Higher alexithymia scores are associated with stronger physiological responses, but lower anticipatory fear ratings and higher discomfort thresholds, particularly in patients with IBS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".