MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402602999 · doi:10.4103/ijoth.ijoth_9_24

Alexithymia in Parents of Children with Neurodevelopmental Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study

2023· article· en· W4402602999 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Norah Mohammed Alauddin, D. Anbarasu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Indian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlexithymiaAutism spectrum disorderPsychologyToronto Alexithymia ScaleAutismCross-sectional studyClinical psychologyAttention deficit hyperactivity disorderTypically developingNeurodevelopmental disorderPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Emotional insight is the distinctive core factor of human characteristics and it is so basic and foundational for every aspect of human understanding, communication, and daily care of life. Recent studies have identified that children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD) and their relatives have difficulties in identifying and recognizing their own emotions. Objectives: The present study was aimed to investigate the level and comparison of alexithymia scores in parent of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and typically developing children (TDC). Study Design: A cross-sectional comparative study. Methods: One hundred and fifty ( N = 150) parents were recruited into the study which includes parents of 50 autism, parents of 50 ADHD, and parents of 50 TDC by means of convenience sampling method. Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 was used to measure alexithymia in parents of NDDs. Results: The study revealed that there was a statistically significant difference in Alexithymia scores between parents of children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attentiondeficit hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and typically developing children (One-Way ANOVA: F = 133.497, P < 0.001). Parents of children with ASD scored significantly higher on Alexithymia (66.26±4.575, t = 6.05172, 95% CI: 64.96 to 67.56) than parents of children with ADHD (59.02±7.116, t = 8.8296, 95% CI: 57.00 to 61.04) and typically developing children (49.36±3.036, 95% CI: 48.50 to 50.22). No significant association was found in Alexithymia scores with respect to gender in children against their parents ( P = 0.267). Similarly, no significant association was found in Alexithymia scores with respect to demographic variables of child’s age, child’s gender, and parental age ( P = 0.064). Conclusion: The results suggest that alexithymia has higher impacts on parents of autism and there is a growing need of necessary focus on alexithymia an important issue in parents of children with NDDs. Thus, it is very essential to treat alexithymia with special focus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Indian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207