68 Neurocognitive Functioning and Symptoms of Psychosis in Precariously Housed Adults with Multimorbidity
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective: In persons with severe psychiatric disorders, distinct neurocognitive profiles hold differential associations to positive, negative and disorganized symptom dimensions of psychosis. These patterns portend specific functional outcomes, treatment efficacy, and prognoses. Similar associations have not been established in multimorbid samples in which persons present with a complex array of psychiatric symptoms. The objective of this study was to (1) establish neurocognitive profiles in a multimorbid, marginalized sample and (2) investigate their pattern(s) of association with psychiatric symptom dimensions and psychosocial outcomes. Participants and Methods: Participants (n=370; Mage = 45 years; 74% male) were precariously housed, substance-using adults with multimorbidity, recruited from Single-Room Occupancy hotels and a community court within the Downtown Eastside of Vancouver, BC, Canada. Data were collected as part of a longitudinal examination consisting of annual, bi-annual, and monthly neurocognitive, psychosocial, and psychiatric assessments. Neurocognitive scores were combined into five cognitive domains (Attentional Control [AC]; Processing Speed [PS]; Fluid Reasoning [Problem Solving and Reversal Learning; Gf]; Encoding and Retrieval [ER]; and Decision Making [DM]) and submitted to a latent profile analysis. The resulting profiles capturing neurocognition were validated on sociodemographic and clinical variables. Finally, the profiles were compared across previously validated, population-distinct factors derived from the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), as well as on measures of psychosocial functioning. Results: An optimal goodness-of-fit was reached for a three-profile model (BLRT=127.86, p=.01). Profile 1 (n=207, 55.9%) showed stronger neurocognition (all p<.05), with a within-profile strength in Gf (p<.001). With the exception of ER, Profile 2 (n=109, 29.5%) exhibited inferior neurocognition across all indicators compared to Profile 1 (all p <.05); yet showed a relative, within-profile strength in Gf (p < .01). Profile 3 (n=54, 14.6%) generally displayed comparable impairments to Profile 2. Additionally, their performance on Gf was remarkably low compared to Profiles 1 and 2 (p<.001). Psychiatrically, compared to Profile 1, Profile 2 exhibited more positive/disorganized symptoms and general psychopathology, as well as higher total PANSS (all p <.05), whereas Profile 3 showed the poorest insight/awareness (p<.01). Profiles 2 and 3 had lower levels of adaptive functioning and work productivity compared to Profile 1 (all p<.01). Conclusions: Three neurocognitive profiles were detected in a sample of precariously housed adults with multimorbidity: one profile of comparatively higher neurocognitive capacity, with less symptoms of psychosis and better psychosocial functioning; a second profile of comparatively poorer neurocognition and psychosocial functioning, with more symptoms of psychosis; and a third profile with a severe deficit in fluid reasoning and poor insight and awareness. Given their poor insight, the third profile may be comprised of particularly vulnerable persons at greater risk of unmet healthcare needs. Interventions to improve these individuals' understanding of their personal health risks might facilitate their capacity to access services. Conversely, individuals from Profile 2 may benefit from outreach programs focusing on medication access and adherence to address their symptoms of psychosis. In sum, our findings suggest that the confluence of neurocognition and psychiatric symptoms may implicate unique treatment approaches and outcomes in precariously-housed persons with multimorbid conditions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».