MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291021037 · doi:10.1055/a-1882-6544

Alexithymie bei Multipler Sklerose – eine narrative Übersicht

2022· review· de· W4291021037 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christina Grigorescu, Moussa A. Chalah, Samar S. Ayache, Ulrich Palm

Bibliographic record

VenueFortschritte der Neurologie · Psychiatrie · 2022
Typereview
Languagede
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaPsychologyClinical psychologyCognitionAnxietyToronto Alexithymia ScaleEtiologyMedicinePsychiatryGynecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexithymia is a multidimensional construct of personality implicating difficulties in identifying and describing another's feelings, and externally oriented thinking. It is broadly reported in psychiatric patients but has gained little attention regarding its occurrence and pathophysiology in multiple sclerosis (MS). This narrative review aims to address prevalence, etiology, neurobiological, and clinical findings of alexithymia. The prevalence of alexithymia in MS ranges from 10 to 53%. There seems to be an association with anxiety, depression, fatigue, and some aspects of social cognition, while the relationship with clinical and classical cognitive variables was rarely evaluated. Only a few studies referred to its pathophysiology assuming an aberrant interhemispheric transfer or regional cerebral abnormalities. The prevalence of alexithymia in MS and the potential negative impact on quality of life and interpersonal communication could severely impact clinical MS management and a screnning for these factors should be mandatory. Thus, further evaluation is needed concerning its relationship with clinical, emotional, and cognitive confounders. Large-scale studies employing neuroimaging techniques are needed for a better understanding of the neural underpinnings of this MS feature.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFortschritte der Neurologie · PsychiatrieSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207