Family Dysfunctional Interactive Patterns and Alexithymia in Adolescent Patients with Restrictive Eating Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adolescents diagnosed with Restrictive Eating Disorders (REDs) are at risk for alexithymia. REDs patients' families show dysfunctional interactive patterns, and childhood family environment influences alexithymia development. We aimed to assess the relationship between family dysfunctional interactive patterns and patients' alexithymia in a sample of adolescents diagnosed with REDs. Forty-five patients and their parents were enrolled. They participated in the clinical version of the Lausanne Triadic Play (LTPc), a standardized observational procedure to assess family functioning. We used the self-report questionnaire Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) to assess patients' alexithymia. The TAS-20 provides a multi-factorial measure of patients' alexithymia: Difficulty in Identifying Feelings, DIF; Difficulty in Describing Feelings, DDF; Externally-oriented Thinking, EOT) and a total (TOT) score. DDF and EOT scores were significantly higher than DIF score. Patients' families showed dysfunctional interactive patterns, with a predominance of collusive alliance. Patients from families characterized by collusive alliance had higher TOT scores compared to counterparts from families exhibiting a different interactive dysfunctional pattern. In families characterized by a collusive triadic alliance, the dysfunctional interactive pattern was linked with the risk of alexithymia in patients with REDs. Assessment of family relationships should be included in the routine consultation with adolescent patients affected by REDs.
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".