MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A multi‐site Canadian perspective: examining the functional outcome from first‐episode psychosis

2009· article· en· W1966440417 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Natasja M. Menezes, Aashish Malla, Ross Norman, Suzanne Archie, Paul Roy, Robert B. Zipursky

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsSubstance abusePsychosisComorbidityCohortOutcome (game theory)PsychiatryPsychologyCohort studyGlobal Assessment of FunctioningExplained variationClinical psychologyMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors contributing to variance in functional outcome in first-episode psychosis (FEP) following 1 year of treatment. METHOD: Naturalistic 1-year follow-up of a FEP cohort (n = 200), from programs in four university centers in Ontario, Canada. Functional recovery was defined by 'Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale' (SOFAS) score>60. Regression analysis examined the contribution of independent variables to variance in functional outcome. RESULTS: Twelve-month outcome measures were available for 76.5% of the original cohort. Of these, 70% reported being in school/work and in satisfactory relationships. The functional recovery rate was 51%, compared to 74% attaining symptomatic remission. The greatest contributors to variance in outcome were ongoing symptoms at 6 months and substance abuse comorbidity. CONCLUSION: After 1 year of treatment, FEP patients show high rates of symptomatic remission and relatively lower rates of functional recovery. Symptoms and substance abuse contribute to variance in outcome.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations64
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Psychiatrica ScandinavicaSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207