The effect of psychotherapy in improving physical and psychiatric symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Functional Dyspepsia (FD) is a common symptom of upper gastrointestinal discomfort. Few data are available on the role of psychotherapy in the treatment of dyspeptic syndromes. This study assesses whether brief core conflictual relationship theme (CCRT) psychoanalytic psychotherapy improves gastrointestinal and psychiatric symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia. METHODS: A randomized, controlled trial was planned in two educational hospitals in city of Babol. Forty-nine patients with FD were randomly assigned to receive standard medication treatment with CCRT psychotherapy (24 participants) or standard medication treatment alone (25 participants). The participants completed the Patient Assessment of Upper Gastrointestinal Symptom Severity Index (PAGI-SYM) and Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R) questionnaires before the trial, after the treatment and at 1 and 12-month follow-ups. The mixed-effects (regression) model was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: The results showed that CCRT psychotherapy improved all of the FD symptoms (heartburn/regurgitation, nausea/vomiting, fullness, bloating, upper abdominal pain, and lower abdominal pain) and many of the psychiatric symptoms (depression, anxiety, somatization, interpersonal sensitivity and paranoid ideation) after the treatment and at 1-month and 12-month follow-ups. CONCLUSION: Brief CCRT psychoanalytic psychotherapy can serve as an effective intervention for promoting gastrointestinal and psychiatric symptoms in patients with functional dyspepsia.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".