Alexithymia in systemic lupus erythematosus: A cross sectional study in a Brazilian sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Alexithymia is considered as a reduced capacity to be aware of, to clearly recognize, and to define one’s feelings with a limited fantasy and a concrete, externally oriented cognitive style. Some studies have stated that alexithymia is more common in systemic lupus erythematosus patients (SLE) than in general population but there is a paucity of studies in such context. Aim To study the prevalence of alexithymia in a sample of SLE patients looking for associated epidemiological and clinical findings and its relationship to quality of life. Methods Cross-sectional study in 93 SLE patients collecting clinical, epidemiological, and serological data, data on quality of life by 12 item short health survey (SF-12), and alexithymia by Toronto scale (TAS-26). Disease’s cumulative damage was measured by Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage index. Results In this sample (90.3% females and median age of 46 years), 55.9% had alexithymia; 22/92 (23.9%) did not and 19/93 (20.4%) had inconclusive results. Alexithymia presence had a positive association with age ( p = 0.01) and a negative association with presence of glomerulonephritis (25% vs 59%; p = 0.005) and glucocorticoid use (19.2% vs 59.0%; p = 0.0007). A negative correlation of TAS-26 was observed with mental domain of ( r = −0.46; p < 0.0001) and physical domain ( r = −0.32; p = 0.004) of SF-12, but not with cumulative damage index. Conclusion We found a high prevalence of alexithymia in this sample of SLE patients that negatively associated with quality of life, but not with cumulative damage index.
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) | 0.001 | 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".