MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981618960 · doi:10.1176/jnp.15.1.58

Mild Procedural Learning Disturbances in Neuroleptic-Naive Patients With Schizophrenia

2003· article· en· W1981618960 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuropsychiatry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyNeurosciencePsychiatryMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether drug-naive patients with schizophrenia present procedural learning disturbances, given that this function is known to involve the striatum and that structural abnormalities of the striatum have been described in these patients. Eleven neuroleptic-free schizophrenic patients were compared with 11 healthy control subjects on a visuomotor procedural learning task (the Mirror Drawing Test). Average performance and learning rate did not differ between the two groups. However, schizophrenia patients were lower in learning smoothness (the consistency with which performance improves from trial to trial), which would indicate difficulty in benefiting from past experience to perform better on a current task. Because low smoothness has recently been found to be associated with striatal dysfunction, these results might indicate a premature dysfunction of the striatum in young drug-naive patients with schizophrenia. However, this dysfunction is not severe enough to prevent learning.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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