INDIAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRY, 2003,45 (IV), 229-233 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
and illness behaviour among female Indian outpatients with multiple somatic symptoms JAYDIP SARKAR, PRABHA CHANDRA Sixty Indian muslim women outpatients with multiple somatic complaints of nonorganic origin were assessed for alexithymia and abnormal illness behaviour using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS) and the Illness Behaviour Assessment Schedule (IBAS). Alexithymia represented by TAS scores correlated best with the IBAS variables of communication of affect, somatic illness causal beliefs and denial. Correlation with other IBAS variables was modest to poor.There was no correlation of IBAS variables with age of patient, duration of illness or nature of diagnosis: somatoform disorder or anxiety and depressive disorders, The study showed that alexithymia and illness behaviour are overlapping constructs and confirmed the usefulness of TAS as an instrument to discriminate between patients with anxiety/ depressive disorders and somatoform disorders Key words: Alexithymia, Illness behaviour, Somatization Somatic symptoms with no physical explanation are often seen in the ciinica[ setting (Kscobar 1987). In non-western cultures especially, psychological distress is often communicated through multiple somatic complaints. Factors that have been considered to be contributorv to such an expression have included lower levels of emancipation (Narang and Aggarwal, 1971), social acceptance of such symptoms (Rastogi et al, 19"'6) and a perceptual style of bodily preoccupation as a dominant response to stress (Kicmman, 1982). Alexithymia, a cognitive-affective disturbance that affects the way in which individuals experience and express their emotions (Simeos, 1973) may be another factor contributing to a somatic experience and expression of psychological ill—health. Indeed studies of psychiatric
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".