Investigation of alexithymia in patients with functional dyspepsia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: In psychometric test scales, patients with a diagnosis of FD have higher scores for anxiety, depression, and somatization than those without. Alexithymia is difficulty in expressing emotions and is closely related to psychosomatic diseases. In this study, we aimed to investigate the presence of alexithymia in patients with functional dyspepsia. Material and methods: This study was conducted prospectively. Laboratory tests, ultrasonography and endoscopy were performed on the patients. TAS 20 questionnaire was applied to the patient and control groups. Statistical analyses were performed using SPPS v.27.0. Results: A total of 80 subjects, 39 patients diagnosed with FD and 41 controls, were included in the study. The TAS-20 scale scores of the patient group were ≥61 in 13 (33.3%), 50-61 in 14 (35.9%), and below 50 in 12 (30.8%), with a mean of 56.2±11.3. In the control group, 1 (2.4%) was ≥61, 10 (24.4%) was between 50-61, 30 (73.2%) was below 50 and the mean was 46.2±5.9(p<0.001). TAS subscales were also significantly higher in the FD group. Conclusions: Alexithymic personality structure should always be considered in patients diagnosed with FD. It can be explained to patients that the emotions they cannot express with words and behaviors are expressed in this way through the body. In this way, we believe that patients may give up their obsession with repeated endoscopies with the concern that I have an organic disease, and health care expenditures may be reduced.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".