MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Relationship Between Emotional Dysregulation, Alexithymia and Somatization in Patients with Bipolar Disorder

2023· article· en· W4315491114 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Batuhan Ayık, Alper Baş, Nazife Gamze Usta Sağlam, Filiz İzci

Bibliographic record

VenueALPHA PSYCHIATRY · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaEmotional dysregulationSomatizationBipolar disorderPsychologyClinical psychologyBipolar II disorderSomatization disorderPsychiatryMoodAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Emotional dysregulation is a basic feature found in patients with bipolar disorder. It was also reported that higher alexithymia scores are a predictive factor for a decrease in social functionality. It is known that patients with bipolar disorder experience more somatic symptoms than the general population. No study has yet been conducted on the interrelation of these 3 clinical domains, which are known to negatively affect the functionality and quality of life in bipolar disorder patients. Methods: This study included 72 bipolar disorder-1 patients. The Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale was used to determine the emotional state of the patients, the Toronto Alexithymia Scale was used to determine the alexithymia scores, and the Somatization Scale was used to determine the somatization scores. Results: < .001). Conclusion: This study found that ED predicted alexithymia and somatization in euthymic bipolar patients. The therapeutic approaches targeting these 3 clinical domains that negatively affect patients' quality of life and functionality may provide positive clinical outcomes.

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)0.002
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALPHA PSYCHIATRYSame topicPsychosomatic Disorders and Their TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207