MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4413803624 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1641020

Cognitive and emotional processing in brothers of individuals with anorexia nervosa: exploring familial cognitive vulnerability

2025· article· en· W4413803624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paolo Meneguzzo, Enrico Ceccato, Alessandra Sala, Paolo Santonastaso

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEating Disorders and Behaviors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyEmpathyCognitionAnorexia nervosaAlexithymiaTheory of mindPopulationCognitive flexibilityClinical psychologyEating disordersAttributionDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is associated with altered cognitive and emotional traits, including deficits in empathy, theory of mind (ToM), and increased alexithymia. While these traits are well-documented in affected individuals, little is known about their presence in unaffected male siblings, who share genetic and environmental risk factors. This study investigates whether male siblings of women with AN (bAN) exhibit intermediate cognitive-emotional traits compared to both their affected sisters and general population (GP) controls. Methods: We assessed 31 bAN, 31 GP, and 31 affected sisters. Participants completed self-report questionnaires (Empathy Quotient, Toronto Alexithymia Scale, Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire) and two computerized tasks evaluating theory of mind (Story-based Empathy Task (SET), Reading the Mind in the Eyes Task). Between-group differences were assessed using non-parametric tests due to the non-normality of the data. A binary logistic regression was then conducted to evaluate whether specific socio-cognitive variables predicted group membership. Results: bAN showed significantly lower scores than the GP on measures of cognitive empathy and theory of mind, particularly Causal Inference (SET-CI; r = 0.594, p < 0.001), Emotional Attribution (SET-EA; r = 0.520, p < 0.001), and Intention Attribution (SET-IA; r = 0.463, p = 0.001). Logistic regression identified SET-CI as the strongest predictor of bAN status. Other empathy and alexithymia measures showed no significant group differences. Conclusion: These findings suggest that domain-general inferential difficulties-particularly in causal reasoning-may be associated with familial vulnerability to anorexia nervosa in male siblings. Further research is needed to clarify the role of such cognitive traits in the broader context of risk and to inform early identification and intervention strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Psychiatry→Same topicEating Disorders and Behaviors→French-language works237,207→