Hypochondriac Beliefs and Behavior in Patients with Somatoform Disorders: Relationship to Somatic Complaints and Subjective Well-Being
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : studies of the psychological mechanisms of perpetuation and quality of life in patients with somatoform disorders are important for identifying targets for psychological interventions and defi ning risk groups. Aim : to reveal specifi c hypochondriac beliefs and behavior in patients with somatoform disorders related to severity of somatic complaints and subjective well-being. Patients and methods : 100 patients with somatoform disorders were assessed by using Screening for Somatoform Symptoms, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Cognitions About Body And Health Questionnaire, Scale for the Assessment of Illness Behaviour, and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire-18. Results : level of somatoform symptoms is higher in patients with a tendency to catastrophize bodily sensations, autonomic disfunction, mental scanning for bodily symptoms, and disturbances in daily activities due to illness. Regardless of somatoform symptoms’ severity, subjective well-being is lower in patients with belief in bodily weakness and somatosensory amplifi cation, autonomic sensations, expression of symptoms, and changes in daily activities due to illness. Conclusions : the results are discussed in the context of possible psychological and behavioral factors in the perpetuation of somatoform disorders. Patients of older age are at risk of perpetuation of somatoform disorders due to a greater tendency to catastrophize bodily sensations and higher belief in bodily weakness.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".