Social competence and observer‐rated social functioning in bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Impairment in social functioning appears to be common in bipolar disorder, although estimates have been derived largely from self-report measures. We examined performance-based and observer-based ratings of social competence and functioning and assessed the contribution of symptoms and neurocognitive ability to social functioning in bipolar disorder. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 164 subjects with bipolar disorder were administered the performance-based Social Skills Performance Assessment (SSPA), rated by an informant on the Specific Level of Functioning (SLOF)-Interpersonal subscale, received clinical ratings of depression and manic symptoms, and performed neurocognitive tests. We assessed the proportion of patients exhibiting social deficits and examined the associations between composite measures of neurocognitive ability, depression and manic symptoms, and SSPA scores with informant-rated, real-world social functioning. RESULTS: Mean age of the sample was 47.6 years (SD = 14.1). Subjects were experiencing, on average, mild levels of depression and minimal manic symptoms. A total of 29% exhibited norm-referenced impairment on the SSPA, and 64% registered at least one impairment on SLOF items; unemployed subjects had lower SSPA and SLOF ratings. Neurocognitive performance correlated with both performance-based and observer-rated social functioning, whereas depressive and manic symptoms correlated only with observer-rated social impairments. In multivariate models, depression was the most potent association with social functioning, and impairment in social competence (i.e., capacity) increased the strength of the relationships between depression and neurocognitive impairment and social functioning (i.e., real-world functioning). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirmed the negative relationship of bipolar depression with social functioning. A subgroup of outpatients with bipolar disorder has impaired social competence, which, when present, worsened the impact of depression and cognitive impairment on social functioning.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".