Role of Traumatic Events and Motivational Structure in Ambiguity Tolerance of Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The main purpose of this study was to delineate the role of motivational structure and traumatic events in the prediction of ambiguity tolerance in patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Methods: A total of 200 patients with the diagnosis of IBS, referred to the Shariati hospital in 2018, were enrolled using a correlational design and convenience sampling. All participants were asked to complete the ambiguity tolerance questionnaire, the life event checklist, and the personal concerns inventory. Data analysis was performed by Pearson correlation method and regression analysis test in SPSS software. Results: Findings showed that there was a significant relationship between traumatic events (r=- 0.66, P=0.01) and adaptive (r=0.24, P=0.01) and non-adaptive motivational structure (non-AMS) (r=- 0.10, P=0.01) with tolerance of ambiguity (P<0.05). With increasing non-AMS and with decreasing non-AMS and traumatic events, the tolerance of ambiguity is increased. Moreover, the motivational structure (adaptive and non-adaptive) and traumatic events could define and predict 43% of the variance in ambiguity tolerance. Conclusion: Thus, regarding the important role of motivational structure and traumatic events in predicting ambiguity tolerance in IBS patients, it is prudent to put emphasis on these measures to improve patients’ overall health and probably alleviate symptoms and provide psychologic rehabilitation.
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".