Associations between emotional awareness deficits and somatic symptoms in a community and clinical populations: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Deficits in emotional awareness may contribute to the development and maintenance of somatic symptoms. This study explored emotional awareness deficits and their association with somatic symptoms among individuals with a high somatic symptom burden from an online community sample, as well as among patients with somatic symptom disorders. METHODS: Emotional awareness deficits were analyzed by comparing 77 individuals with a high somatic symptom burden and 129 individuals with a low somatic symptom burden from a community population (Study 1). The severity of somatic symptom burden was measured using the Somatic Symptom Scale-8, with scores of eight or higher classified as high. Deficits in emotional awareness in clinical somatic symptoms were examined by comparing 34 patients with somatic symptom disorders to 34 matched healthy controls (Study 2). Emotional awareness was assessed by evaluating alexithymia using the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and empathy using the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI). Multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) was conducted to examine group differences in emotional awareness while controlling for potential covariates. RESULTS: After adjusting for covariates, the MANCOVA results in Study 1 revealed significantly higher scores on the Difficulty Identifying Feelings subscale of the TAS-20 and the Personal Distress subscale of the IRI among participants with a high somatic symptom burden. These findings were replicated in Study 2, where patients with somatic symptom disorders exhibited deficits comparable to those of healthy controls. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that difficulties in emotional awareness are closely associated with somatic symptoms in both clinical and community populations. Interventions aimed at improving emotional awareness may alleviate the manifestations of somatic symptoms and prevent related functional impairments. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".