Concerns reported by family members of individuals with first-episode psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Our aim was to examine the concerns reported by family members and other caregivers of individuals with first-episode psychosis (FEP). METHODS: Family members who attended group psychoeducation selected their top two concerns from a list of nine concerns: stigma, medication, substance abuse, social behaviour, stressful situations, self-esteem and identity, sexuality and intimacy, early warning signs, and resources and support. RESULTS: Parents, particularly mothers, were a significant majority of those who attended psychoeducation sessions. In order of frequency of endorsement, the concerns endorsed were self-esteem and identity, social behaviour, substance abuse, medications, stressful situations, early warning signs, resources and support, stigma, and sexuality and intimacy. CONCLUSION: Families were most concerned about the self-esteem and identity of their young relatives with FEP. Our findings suggest that early intervention programmes should specifically address issues of self-esteem and identity. Further research on the concerns shared by families of individuals with FEP is needed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".