Onverklaarde chronische vermoeidheid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research indicates that in functional somatic disorders the request for therapeutic help is related to either medical symptoms or interpersonal problems. We test whether a specific type of request for help is present in a sample of primary care patients with either chronic fatigue syndrome; a chronic cardiovascular or auto-immune disease; or a minor medical condition. In this study 155 primary care patients were recruited through 52 primary care practitioners: 52 chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) patients; 52 patients with a cardiovascular or auto-immune disease; 51 patients with a minor medical condition. Interpersonal problems were assessed by means of the Inventory for Patients' Request for Help (HLV). Chronic Fatigue Syndrome was measured with the Checklist Individual Strength (CIS); alexithymia was assessed by means of the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20); and the driven and impatient interpersonal functioning by the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS). Results indicate that CFS patients have a significantly more consumer related request for help with the emphasis on symptom reduction. Prolonged and debilitating fatigue was significantly related to a request for medical and liaison-psychiatric help; a help request in a more impatient functioning is related to higher complaint behavior; and alexithymia was related to a request for specific medical aid. We found no specific therapeutic relationship in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. We conclude that the exact status of the therapeutic relationship in CFS and cardiovascular or auto-immune disease remains undecided, but clearly the request for consumer help and symptom reduction is related to CFS as a population.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.009 |
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".