Mediating Role of Stress, Anxiety, and Depression in Relation Between Alexithymia, and Functional Dyspepsia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim and Background: Functional dyspepsia is a chronic disorder of the upper gastrointestinal tract that anatomical or biochemical abnormalities do not explain it. The purpose of this study was to assess the mediating role of stress, anxiety, and depression in the relationship between Alexithymia and functional dyspepsia. Methods and Materials: This research was a correlational study. 224 male and female patients with functional dyspepsia were selected by available sampling method according to the inclusion criteria. Stress, anxiety, and depression in patients were evaluated by Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (21-item) (DASS-21); Alexithymia was evaluated by Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS); and after primary diagnosis of gastroenterologist, severity of functional dyspepsia was evaluated by Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS). Finally, data analysis was performed using SmartPLS software. Findings: Alexithymia directly affected the severity of functional dyspepsia (effect size: 0.44). Moreover, Alexithymia by mediation of depression (0.20) and anxiety (0.17) affected the severity of dyspepsia at the level of 95% confidence interval (CI). However, because of the insignificance of path coefficient between the variables of stress and functional dyspepsia (T-value < 1.96), the indirect effect of the Alexithymia on the severity of functional dyspepsia with the mediation of stress was not confirmed. Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate the important role of psychological factors (Alexithymia, anxiety, and depression) in 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".