A case -control study on the effect of alexithymia in patients of chronic urticarial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic urticaria (CU) places a substantial physical and emotional strain on individuals, impacting their overall quality of life. Alexithymia, described as difficulty experiencing, identifying and expressing emotions, is a characteristic linked to various skin conditions including CU. This study was carried out to assess how alexithymia compares between patients with chronic urticaria and individuals without the condition. We included a total of 50 individuals with chronic urticaria (CU) and 50 healthy individuals as controls. All participants were asked to complete the Toronto Alexithymia Score (TAS-20) questionnaire as part of the study assessment. In our study we found the following patterns within the chronic urticaria (CU) group: 52% exhibited clear characteristics of alexithymia, 30% showed potential signs of alexithymia and 18% of participants had no indications of alexithymia. Among those who displayed alexithymia, the majority (88.5%) were in the non-controlled CU group category. When we examined the TAS-20 categories, we noticed gender differences among participants with alexithymia: 57.1% were female and 45.5% were male, suggesting a female predominance. In the control group, TAS-20 categorization revealed the following: 52% of participants had no alexithymia, 32% displayed potential alexithymia and 16% showed signs of alexithymia Individuals with chronic urticaria (CU) tend to exhibit higher levels of alexithymia, particularly in the DIF (Difficulty Identifying Feelings) and DDF (Difficulty Describing Feelings) subscales, when compared to individuals in the control population.
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) | 0.001 | 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".