Relationship Between Alexithymia, Cognitive Function and the Pain and Emotional Symptoms in Adolescent Migraine Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Exploring the relationship between alexithymia, cognitive function and the pain and emotional symptoms in adolescent patients with migraines. METHODS: The Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS)-20 was used to evaluate adolescent patients with migraines. A total score of TAS-20 ≤51 scores was defined as no alexithymia, and the patients were divided into alexithymia group and no alexithymia group. Both groups of patients were evaluated using a visual analog scale (VAS), Hamilton Anxiety Scale, Hamilton Depression Scale, and Chinese version of the Neuropsychological State Test (Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status [RBANS]). Emotional symptoms, cognitive function, pain levels, serum levels of serotonin (5-HT), matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-9, and lysophosphatidic acid were compared in the two groups. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was constructed. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the severity of emotional symptoms, pain, anxiety, and depression, as well as cognitive function between the two groups (p<0.05). There was a significant difference in serum 5-HT and MMP-9 levels between the two groups (p<0.05). Alexithymia was negatively correlated with immediate memory, speech function, delayed memory, and RBANS total score. Cognitive function may have a partial mediating role in pain, anxiety, and depression in the constructed SEM. CONCLUSION: Alexithymia was shown to have a close relationship with cognitive function, and the pain, anxiety, and depression among adolescent patients with migraines. Alexithymia might affect the pain, anxiety, and depression in adolescent patients with migraines through partial mediation of cognitive function as shown in the constructed SEM.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".