Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39509403›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2024

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between subjective interoception and alexithymia: Implications for construct definitions and measurement.

Kristen Van Bael, Jessica Scarfo, Emra Suleyman, Jessica Katherveloo, Natasha Grimble, Michelle Ball

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. How alexithymia shapes functional networks: Insights from a general population study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kristen Van BaelInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6646-1067
Jessica ScarfoInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Emra SuleymanInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jessica KathervelooInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6292-6760
Natasha GrimbleInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Michelle BallInstitute for Health and Sport, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although research indicates that self-reported interoception is associated with deficits in identifying and describing emotional experience, and externally oriented thinking styles (alexithymia), this relationship appears moderated by how interoception is measured. A systematic review and meta-analyses examined the association between self-reported interoception and alexithymia, investigating how different interoceptive questionnaires relate to alexithymia at global and facet levels. PsychINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched with predefined terms related to self-reported interoception and alexithymia. Three reviewers independently assessed articles, extracted data, and undertook risk of bias assessment. Thirty-two cross-sectional studies published between 1996 and 2023 were included. Random-effects meta-analyses and narrative synthesis indicated that global alexithymia was positively associated with measures of interoceptive confusion, autonomic nervous system reactivity, and heightened interoceptive attention, and inversely associated with interoceptive accuracy and adaptive interoception, indexed by composite Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness scores, but particularly interoceptive trusting, self-regulation, and attention regulation. These patterns were observed for alexithymic facets and stronger in magnitude for difficulty identifying feelings and difficulty describing feelings, relative to externally oriented thinking. Overall, results suggested that the association between self-reported interoception and alexithymia differs as a function of the interoceptive self-report. The review highlighted issues with construct definition and operationalisation and determined that existing interoceptive self-reports broadly capture maladaptive and adaptive sensing, attention, interpretation, and memory. The findings underscore the importance of specifying interoceptive constructs and using appropriate assessments to improve convergence between constructs and measurements, further suggesting potential clinical utility in using existing self-reports to measure interoception and alexithymia, facilitating interventions targeting mind-body connections.

Indexed as

Affective SymptomsInteroceptionEmotionsHumansSelf ReportSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39509403
PMCPMC11542822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.