Clinical correlates associated with cognitive dysfunction in people with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the correlation between cognitive function and clinical variables in people with schizophrenia. METHODS: The subjects were 61 stabilized outpatients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV). Their mean age was 40.1 (SD = 12.2) years. All subjects gave written informed consent to participate in the research. Cognitive function was evaluated using the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia. Clinical symptoms were assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, and the Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale. RESULTS: The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale Negative syndrome score was significantly correlated with verbal memory score (r = -0.37, P < 0.01), working memory score (r = 0.38, P < 0.01), attention and speed of information processing score (r = -0.51, P < 0.01), verbal fluency score (r = -0.39, P < 0.01), and composite score (r = -0.54, P < 0.01). In addition, the Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale score was significantly correlated with attention and speed of information processing (r = -0.45, P < 0.01), and composite score (r = -0.41, P < 0. 01). Dose of antipsychotics and anti-Parkinson drugs was not significantly correlated with the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia scores. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that cognitive dysfunction of people with schizophrenia might be associated with negative and drug-induced extrapyramidal symptoms, suggesting that their minimization would be important for improving cognitive dysfunction.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".