To evaluate the relationship between quality of life (QOL) and physical as well as psychological variables in Chinese breast cancer patients. This multicenter cross-sectional study enrolled 254 Chinese breast cancer patients in different stages and treatment phases. They answered standard instruments assessing QOL (EORTC), somatic symptom severity (PHQ-15), depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), health-related anxiety (WI-7), illness perception (BIPQ), and sense of coherence (SOC-9). Canonical correlation was applied to identify the strongest correlates between the physical, emotional and social QOL scales and the physical and psychological variables. In our sample, a low global QOL was significantly associated with the following physical and psychological variables: symptom-related disability (Karnofsky Index) (r = .211, p < .01), somatic symptom severity (r = −.391, p < .001), depression (r = −.488, p < .001), anxiety (r = −.439, p < .001), health-related anxiety (r = −.398, p < .001), dysfunctional illness perception (r = −.411, p < .001), and sense of coherence (r = .371, p < .001). In the canonical correlation analysis, high somatic symptom severity, depression, anxiety, dysfunctional illness perception, and low sense of coherence showed the strongest correlations with low physical, emotional and social functioning. The first three significant canonical correlations between these two sets of variables were .78, .56, and .45. QOL in Chinese breast cancer patients is strongly associated with psychological factors. Our results suggest that Chinese physicians and nurses should incorporate these factors into their care for women with breast cancer to improve patients’ QOL.

Objectives. Overlaps between different functional gastrointestinal disorders (FGIDs) are common. However, little is known about the impact of this overlap on patients’ health status. This study is aimed at analyzing the differences between patients with multiple as compared to one single FGID. Methods. A retrospective, cross-sectional study was conducted with patients presenting to a tertiary care FGID specialty clinic between 06/2012 and 01/2015 (n=294). They were characterized primarily according to their GI symptom severity (IBS-SSS) and secondarily to their physical as well as psychosocial symptom burden, quality of life, health care utilization, and work-related impairment. Differences between patients with >1 vs. 1 FGID were analyzed. Results. Of the 294 patients, 92.2% fulfilled the Rome III criteria for any FGID, and 48.0% had >1 FGIDs. FGID patients had a median age of 38 [23.0] years; 72.0% were female. Median GI symptom severity (IBS-SSS) scores were 339 [126] and 232 [163] in patients with >1 and 1 FGID, respectively (p<.001). Furthermore, patients with >1 FGIDs had higher general somatic symptom severity, higher illness anxiety, lower quality of life, and more work-related impairment. Almost no differences were found regarding their somatic as well as mental comorbidities. Conclusions. Multiple FGIDs are associated with an increased risk for complicated courses of illness as reflected in higher GI and somatic symptom severity, as well as stronger psychosocial and diet- and work-related impairment. Stepped and interdisciplinary models of care including psychosocial expertise and dietary advice are needed, especially for patients with multiple FGIDs.

Background: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in mental health, showing promise in assessing disorders. However, concerns exist regarding their accuracy, reliability, and fairness. Societal biases and underrepresentation of certain populations may impact LLMs. Because LLMs are already used for clinical practice, including decision support, it is important to investigate potential biases to ensure a responsible use of LLMs. Anorexia nervosa (AN) and bulimia nervosa (BN) show a lifetime prevalence of 1%‐2%, affecting more women than men. Among men, homosexual men face a higher risk of eating disorders (EDs) than heterosexual men. However, men are underrepresented in ED research, and studies on gender, sexual orientation, and their impact on AN and BN prevalence, symptoms, and treatment outcomes remain limited. Objectives: We aimed to estimate the presence and size of bias related to gender and sexual orientation produced by a common LLM as well as a smaller LLM specifically trained for mental health analyses, exemplified in the context of ED symptomatology and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with AN or BN. Methods: We extracted 30 case vignettes (22 AN and 8 BN) from scientific papers. We adapted each vignette to create 4 versions, describing a female versus male patient living with their female versus male partner (2 × 2 design), yielding 120 vignettes. We then fed each vignette into ChatGPT-4 and to “MentaLLaMA” based on the Large Language Model Meta AI (LLaMA) architecture thrice with the instruction to evaluate them by providing responses to 2 psychometric instruments, the RAND-36 questionnaire assessing HRQoL and the eating disorder examination questionnaire. With the resulting LLM-generated scores, we calculated multilevel models with a random intercept for gender and sexual orientation (accounting for within-vignette variance), nested in vignettes (accounting for between-vignette variance). Results: In ChatGPT-4, the multilevel model with 360 observations indicated a significant association with gender for the RAND-36 mental composite summary (conditional means: 12.8 for male and 15.1 for female cases; 95% CI of the effect –6.15 to −0.35; P=.04) but neither with sexual orientation (P=.71) nor with an interaction effect (P=.37). We found no indications for main effects of gender (conditional means: 5.65 for male and 5.61 for female cases; 95% CI –0.10 to 0.14; P=.88), sexual orientation (conditional means: 5.63 for heterosexual and 5.62 for homosexual cases; 95% CI –0.14 to 0.09; P=.67), or for an interaction effect (P=.61, 95% CI –0.11 to 0.19) for the eating disorder examination questionnaire overall score (conditional means 5.59‐5.65 95% CIs 5.45 to 5.7). MentaLLaMA did not yield reliable results. Conclusions: LLM-generated mental HRQoL estimates for AN and BN case vignettes may be biased by gender, with male cases scoring lower despite no real-world evidence supporting this pattern. This highlights the risk of bias in generative artificial intelligence in the field of mental health. Understanding and mitigating biases related to gender and other factors, such as ethnicity, and socioeconomic status are crucial for responsible use in diagnostics and treatment recommendations.

The aim of this study was to test the operationalization of DSM-5 somatic symptom disorder (SSD) psychological criteria among Chinese general hospital outpatients. This multicenter, cross-sectional study enrolled 491 patients from 10 general hospital outpatient departments. The structured clinical “interview about cognitive, affective, and behavioral features associated with somatic complaints” was used to operationalize the SSD criteria B. For comparison, DSM-IV somatoform disorders were assessed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview plus. Cohen’s к scores were given to illustrate the agreement of the diagnoses. A three-structure model of the interview, within which items were classified as respectively assessing the cognitive (B1), affective (B2), and behavioral (B3) features, was examined. According to percentages of screening-positive persons and the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis, a cut-off point of 2 was recommended for each subscale of the interview. With the operationalization, the frequency of DSM-5 SSD was estimated as 36.5% in our sample, and that of DSM-IV somatoform disorders was 8.2%. The agreement between them was small (Cohen’s к = 0.152). Comparisons of sociodemographic features of SSD patients with different severity levels (mild, moderate, severe) showed that mild SSD patients were better-off in terms of financial and employment status, and that the severity subtypes were congruent with the level of depression, anxiety, quality of life impairment, and the frequency of doctor visits. The operationalization of the diagnosis and severity specifications of SSD was valid, but the diagnostic agreement between DSM-5 SSD and DSM-IV somatoform disorders was small. The interpretation the SSD criteria should be made cautiously, so that the diagnosis would not became over-inclusive.