EPA-1116 - Obesity affects cognitive performances even in the absence of obvious psychopathological alterations. a comparison with schizophrenia subjects and non-affected controls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obesity has been associated with cognitive impairment. However, it is not clear whether cognitive impairment may depend on concomitant psychopathology, since several psychiatric conditions, e.g. schizophrenia, include cognitive deficits among their manifestations. To assess cognitive performances and psychopathology in obese patients, and to compare cognitive alterations in obese patients with those in schizophrenics and controls. To compare cognitive performances in obese patients to normal percentiles. To provide an analysis of correlation with specific psychopathological domains. To evaluate whether cognitive performances in very obese patients were different from those in schizophrenia patients and non-affected controls. 88 obese patients were included. Exclusion criteria were: axis I and II diagnosis; severe medical, neurological, or endocrinology conditions. Patients underwent an extensive battery of cognitive tests and completed the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). In the second part of the study, very obese patients (BMI>40; n=16) were compared for cognitive performances to schizophrenia patients (n=16) and non-affected controls (n=17). Obese patients performed at low percentiles (<15) on the Problem Solving and the Social Cognition tasks. Mean scores on psychopathology rating scales did not reach abnormal values. No correlation was found with psychopathology. When compared to schizophrenics, no significant differences were found in performances on spatial working memory. Obese patients show cognitive alterations even in the absence of abnormal psychopathology. Very obese patients share cognitive alterations with schizophrenia patients, which may imply common neurobiological basis.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".