MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study on the physiological factors, psychological factors and social factors of patients with somatoform disorders

2015· article· en· W3031503239 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lingli Kong, Min Yan, Gui-hua Chang, Xiaoming Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueZhonghua xingwei yixue yu naokexue zazhi · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinnesota Multiphasic Personality InventoryPsychosocialAlexithymiaHamdInternal medicineClinical psychologyMedicineToronto Alexithymia ScaleDepression (economics)PsychologyRating scalePsychiatrySignificant differencePersonality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To explore the physiological and psychosocial risk factors of the patients with somatoform disorders and to provide references for clinical psychological intervention. Methods Totally 60 patients with somatoform disorder and 60 normal controls were tested with biochemical analyzer, electrocardiogram machine, electroencephalogram machine, computed tomographic scanner, general situation questionnaire, minnesota multiphasic personality inventory(MMPI), toronto alexithymia scale(TAS), life event scale(LES), defense style questionnaire(DSQ) and social support rating scale(SSRS) to explore the physiological and psychosocial risk factors of the patients with somatoform disorders. Results The score of immature defense styles of the study group(4.04±0.89)were higher than those in the control group(3.43±0.65)with significant difference(P<0.05). The total and factor scores of TAS of study group((86.20±11.15), (21.12±3.28), (26.08±3.86), (18.21±4.69), (23.44±5.60)) were higher than control group((65.00±10.12), (12.43±5.18), (15.64±5.57), (15.56±3.16), (18.71±4.30)) with significant difference(P<0.05). The MMPI scale scores of Hs(hypochondriasis), D(depression), Hy(hysteria), Men-Nancy(Mf), Paranoid(Pa), Psychotic(Pt) were higher in patients with somatoform disorder((72.79±10.50), (68.46±13.63), (79.03±12.12), (51.72±7.74), (57.98±10.60), (54.98±8.83)) than those in normal controls((51.66±10.11), (47.96±9.42), (51.47±11.90), (43.66±8.77), (47.67±6.69), (47.48±8.67)) with significant difference(P<0.05). The total life event score and the negative life event score of LES of the study group((89.66±68.60), (82.65±65.16)) were higher than those in the control group((56.00±56.79), (39.14±46.05)) with significant difference(P<0.05). Multiple factors logistic regression analysis showed immature defense styles, higher alexithymia score, higher negative life event score, higher HS, D, Hy of MMPI may increase the risk of somatoform disorders(OR=6.84, 9.12, 5.83, 2.69, 1.81, 11.20, P<0.01). Conclusion Patients with somatoform disorder are almost in normal physiological condition.They have the personality characteristics and significant alexithymia.Their social support are almost normal, but they have more negative life events and their defense styles are almost immature. Key words: Somatoform disorders; Physiological factors; Psychological factors; Social factors

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZhonghua xingwei yixue yu naokexue zazhiSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207