↓ Skip to main content

Abuse, Dissociation, and Somatization in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Towards an Explanatory Model

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Behavioral Medicine, February 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
123 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Abuse, Dissociation, and Somatization in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Towards an Explanatory Model
Published in
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, February 2003
DOI 10.1023/a:1021718304633
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Salmon, Katherine Skaife, Jonathan Rhodes

Abstract

This study tested a preliminary model of the role of dissociation and somatization in linking abuse to irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Outpatients with IBS (N = 64) or bowel symptoms explained by physical disease (N = 61) completed questionnaires to assess recollections of abuse as children or adults and current dissociation, somatization, and emotional distress. By comparison with physically diseased patients, patients with IBS recalled more sexual abuse as children and adults, more physical abuse as children, and more psychological abuse as adults. They were more anxious and depressed, and somatized and dissociated more. Analyses indicated a causal chain linking, in turn, abuse, dissociation, somatization, and IBS. The results are consistent with a model in which childhood abuse is linked to IBS because it causes a tendency to dissociate, and because dissociation causes a general increase in physical symptoms. Future research should identify factors that explain why a generally increased level of physical symptoms should, in some patients, lead specifically to IBS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
Belgium 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 117 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 19%
Student > Bachelor 21 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 24 20%
Unknown 22 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 35%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 25%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 27 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 June 2012.
All research outputs
#6,571,725
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#414
of 1,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,592
of 140,948 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,148 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 140,948 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them