Childhood Trauma, Alexithymia and Emotional Dysregulation in Adults with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of the current study was to find out the relationship among childhood trauma, emotional dysregulation and alexithymia in adults with obsessive compulsive disorder. Design: Correlational research design was implementedSubject and method: The participants with the age ranged 20-44 years (51.1% males and 48.9% females) were selected through purposive sampling strategy diagnosed with obsessive compulsive disorder from different hospitals in Lahore. Toronto Alexithymia Scale (Bagby, 1994), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire-short form (Bernstein & Fink, 1998) and Emotional Regulation Inventory (Roth et al., 2009) were utilized. Result and conclusion: Results revealed that childhood trauma was significantly associated with emotional dysregulation (r=.86, p<.000) and alexithymia (r=.78, p<.000). In addition, mediation analysis showed the significant indirect pathway of the alexithymia (z= 8.91, p<.00) which further revealed that there is variation from alexithymia among childhood trauma and emotional dysregulation. Thus, findings revealed that there was a significant correlation between childhood trauma and emotional dysregulation among adults with obsessive compulsive disorder. Alexithymia significantly mediates the association between childhood trauma and emotional dysregulation. Moreover, this research would be beneficial to fill out the research gap in Pakistani literature as there is scarcity in studying the mediating pathway of alexithymia among obsessive compulsive disorder adults in Pakistan
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".