Alexithymia in primary ciliary dyskinesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Recent evidence suggests that alexithymic deficits in emotional processing may also affect physical health, and alexithymia may also be associated with organic disorders. The emotional well-being of patients with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is often negatively affected by uncertainty about the prognosis, lack of ongoing medical care, and lack of symptom control. This study aims to evaluate the frequency of alexithymia and its possible impact on the management of childhood PCD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects were recruited from patients with PCD and healthy volunteers aged 8-18 years. The questionnaire included sociodemographic characteristics and self-report scales. Data were compared between patient and control groups. RESULTS: In the >14 years of age group, the total Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) score was significantly higher in the patients (56.60 ± 13.01) compared to the control group (46.47 ± 7.50) (p = .007). There were 6 (30) patients with a TAS-20 score ≥61. There was a significant correlation between TAS-20 and Pediatric Quality of Life (PedsQL) score (child), but no correlation between TAS-20 and Kovacs Children Depression Inventory (CDI) and PedsQL score (parents). The TAS-20 score was significantly higher in patients with bronchiectasis (p = .035), nasal polyps (p = .045), and siblings with PCD (p = .001). Furthermore, the TAS-20 score had a significant negative correlation with pulmonary function tests. CONCLUSION: Although this study is based on limited data from a single center and cannot be generalized to all PCD patient communities, our results show that PCD patients are more likely to have alexithymia compared to healthy controls and highlight the need to evaluate for alexithymia in patients with PCD. It is important for pediatric pulmonologists to have a thorough knowledge of the alexithymic features associated with PCD and to refer patients to pediatric psychiatry when necessary, especially in patients who are noncompliant with treatment protocols.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".