MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1909672136 · doi:10.1111/eip.12058

Perceived discrimination in those at clinical high risk for psychosis

2013· article· en· W1909672136 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly Intervention in Psychiatry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPsychosisPsychologySchema (genetic algorithms)Clinical psychologyNegative symptomPsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: There is evidence to suggest that perceived discrimination may be associated with psychosis. Less is known about its potential impact on those at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of perceived discrimination in a CHR sample and its possible relationship to attenuated positive symptoms and negative self-beliefs. METHODS: Participants were 360 CHR individuals and 180 healthy controls. Assessments included a self-report measure of perceived discrimination, the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms and the Brief Core Schema Scale. RESULTS: CHR participants reported significantly more perceived discrimination. Perceived discrimination was significantly associated with negative schemas, but not with attenuated positive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that individuals at CHR for psychosis endorse a higher level of perceived discrimination, which is associated with increased negative schemas, but not attenuated positive symptoms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.350 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it