Sexual dimorphism of spatial working memory profiles in schizophrenia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of the present study was to compare spatial working memory performance of females and males schizophrenia patients to verify whether the sexual dimorphism of spatial abilities present in the general population is found also in schizophrenia. METHODS: We analysed different types of errors committed by each gender on the spatial working memory test of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery to determine potential differences between them. RESULTS: Despite the lack of difference in the number of errors between men and women, different profiles of errors were associated with the strategy used according to gender. The men's strategy was better compared to women. Specifically, for women strategy score correlated positively with searches in previously visited boxes, whereas for men it correlated with both previously visited boxes and never visited ones. However, men's strategy is more impaired by the number of revisits in boxes in which tokens have previously been found than female's one. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggested impaired either central executive and/or visuospatial sketchpad of working memory in patients with schizophrenia. We demonstrated also that the worsening of strategy in men is principally due to central executive deficits compared to women with schizophrenia. The study of sex differences in cognitive performances could help in delineating partially different endophenotypes of schizophrenia in men and women.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it