Psychopathological Characteristics in Patients with Arginine Vasopressin Deficiency (Central Diabetes Insipidus) and Primary Polydipsia Compared to Healthy Controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Distinguishing arginine vasopressin deficiency (AVP-D; central diabetes insipidus) from primary polydipsia (PP), commonly referred to as psychogenic polydipsia, is challenging. Psychopathologic findings, commonly used for PP diagnosis in clinical practice, are rarely evaluated in AVP-D patients, and no comparative data between the two conditions currently exist. DESIGN Data from two studies involving 82 participants [39 AVP-D, 28 PP, and 15 healthy controls (HC)]. METHODS Psychological evaluations were conducted using standardized questionnaires measuring anxiety [State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)], alexithymia [Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20)], depressive symptoms (Beck's Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), and overall mental health [Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36)]. Higher STAI, TAS-20, and BDI-II scores suggest elevated anxiety, alexithymia, and depression, while higher SF-36 scores signify better overall mental health. RESULTS Compared to HC, patients with AVP-D and PP showed higher levels of anxiety (HC 28 points [24-31] vs AVP-D 36 points [31-45]; vs PP 38 points [33-46], P < .01), alexithymia (HC 30 points [29-37] vs AVP-D 43 points [35-54]; vs PP 46 points [37-55], P < .01), and depression (HC 1 point [0-2] vs AVP-D 7 points [4-14]; vs PP 7 points [3-13], P < .01). Levels of anxiety, alexithymia, and depression showed no difference between both patient groups (P = .58, P = .90, P = .50, respectively). Compared to HC, patients with AVP-D and PP reported similarly reduced self-reported overall mental health scores (HC 84 [68-88] vs AVP-D 60 [52-80], P = .05; vs PP 60 [47-74], P < .01). CONCLUSION This study reveals heightened anxiety, alexithymia, depression, and diminished overall mental health in patients with AVP-D and PP. The results emphasize the need for careful interpretation of psychopathological characteristics to differentiate between AVP-D and PP.
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".