Mediatory effect of alexythymia on the relationship between cyberchondria and somatosensory amplification in psoriasis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: We hypothesized that the level of cyberchondria may be related to exaggeration of bodily sensations in patients diagnosed with psoriasis and that the level of alexithymia may have a mediating effect on this relationship. Materials and Methods: Our research sample consists of 101 patients diagnosed with Psoriasis and 89 healthy controls. Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) was applied to patients diagnosed with psoriasis. All participants completed the Sociodemographic Data Form, Cyberchondria Severity Scale (CCS), Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Beck AnxietyInventory (BAI) and Somatosensory Amplification Scale (SSAS). Results: SCÖ F1, F2 subscale and total scores in the control group; f5 scores were statistically significantly higher in the psoriasis group. SSAS total scores in the psoriasis group were statistically significantly higher than in the control group. A significant, positive and low level correlation was found between PASI and SCS f1, BD and ssas scores in psoriasis patients. There is a significant, positive and significant difference between PASI and BA scores. A moderate correlation was found. The mediating effect of alexithymia in the relationship between cyberchondria and exaggeration of bodily sensations. In the mediation analysis examined, alexithymia was found to be a partial mediator. Both the direct and indirect (mediating effect) effects of cyberchondria on alexithymia are significant. Conclusion: Alexithymia has a mediating effect on the relationship between cyberchondria and exaggeration of bodily sensations in patients with psoriasis. In clinical practice, assessing the level of exaggeration of bodily sensations and alexithymia may be predictive to determine the pathological level of health information seeking behavior in people suffering from chronic diseases such as psoriasis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".