MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114395691 · doi:10.3390/jcm10010044

Alexithymia in Alzheimer’s Disease

2020· article· en· W3114395691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eva M. Arroyo-Anlló, Corinne Souchaud, Pierre Ingrand, Jorge Chamorro Sánchez, Alejandra Melero Ventola, Roger Gil

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleCognitionFeelingClinical psychologyNeuropsychologyMedicineDiseaseAssociation (psychology)Mann–Whitney U testPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexithymia is widely recognized as the inability to identify and express emotions. It is a construct which consists of four cognitive traits such as difficulty in identifying feelings, describing feelings to others, externally oriented thinking, and limited imaginative capacity. Several studies have linked alexithymia to cognitive functioning, observing greater alexithymia scores associated with poorer cognitive abilities. Despite Alzheimer’s disease (AD) being a neurodegenerative pathology characterized by cognitive troubles from the early stages, associated to behavioral and emotional disturbances, very few investigations have studied the alexithymia in AD. These studies have shown that alexithymia scores—assessed with Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS)—were greater in AD patients than healthy participants. The objective of the study was to investigate if the alexithymia was present in patients with mild AD. We hypothesized that the AD group would show more alexithymia features than the control group. We evaluated 54 subjects, including 27 patients diagnosed with mild AD and 27 normal healthy controls, using the Shalling Sifneos Psychosomatic Scale (SSPS-R) and a neuropsychological test battery. Using non-parametric statistical analyses—Wilcoxon and Mann–Whitney U tests—we observed that the SSPS-R scores were similar in the AD and control groups. All participants showed SSPS-R scores below to 10 points, which means no-alexithymia. We did not find significant correlations between SSPS-R scores and cognitive variables in both groups (p > 0.22), but we observed a negative association between name abilities and alexithymia, but it does not reach to significance (p = 0.07). However, a significant correlation between SSPS-R score and mood state, assessed using Zerssen Rating Scale, was found in both groups (p = 0.01). Because we did not find a significant difference in the alexithymia assessment between both subject groups, pot hoc analyses were computed for each item of the SSPS-R. We made comparisons of alexithymic responses percentages in each SSPS-R item between AD and control groups, using Fisher’s test. We observed that AD patients produced more alexithymic responses in some items of SSPS-R test than the control group, particularly about difficulties to find the words to describe feelings, as well as difficulties of imagination capacity and externally oriented thinking. The present results do not confirm our hypothesis and they do not support the results of previous studies revealing great alexithymia in AD.

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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.446
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207