MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966150925 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0000000000000290

North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS 2)

2015· article· en· W1966150925 on OpenAlexaff
Jean Addington, Lu Liu, Lisa Buchy, Kristin S. Cadenhead, Tyrone D. Cannon, Barbara A. Cornblatt, Diana O. Perkins, Larry J. Seidman, Ming T. Tsuang, Elaine F. Walker, Scott W. Woods, Carrie E. Bearden, Daniel H. Mathalon, Thomas H. McGlashan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsProdromePsychosisLongitudinal studyPsychiatrySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Clinical psychologyPositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleMedicinePsychologyPediatricsInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In studies describing the long-term follow-up up of youth at clinical high risk (CHR) of psychosis, little attention has been given to details of specific prodromal symptoms. In this paper, we describe the prodromal symptoms of 764 CHR participants recruited in the multi-site North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS). Symptoms were rated on the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS) at baseline and 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-month follow-ups. Clinical outcome at the 2-year assessment was categorized as psychotic, prodromal progression, symptomatic or in remission. Most of the CHR sample (92%) met criteria for the attenuated positive symptoms syndrome (APSS). Significant improvements in SOPS symptoms were observed over time. Unusual thought content, disorganized communication, and overall ratings on disorganized symptoms differentiated those who transitioned to psychosis from the other clinical outcome groups. Suspiciousness and total positive symptoms differentiated those in remission from the other clinical outcome groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations231
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental DiseaseSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207