PW01-183 - Relationship Of Personality Disorders To The Symptoms Of Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction It is well estabhished that the frequency of all types of personality disorders are increased in schizophrenia. Stable personality traits influence the progress of the illness. The aim of this study was to investigate comorbid personality disorders and their relations with positive and negative symptoms in schizophrenia patients. Materials and methods Data belonging to 27 female and 23 male schizophrenic patients (n=50) followed-up in our outpatient clinic constituted our series. Any patients having a history of mental retardation, head injury, prior neurological illness, alchohol or substance abuse were excluded. All patients were in a clinically stable phase of illness, and having no changes in medication for at least three months. Having obtained informed consent, patients were administered the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID) as well as the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), Hamilton Axiety Scale (HAM-A), Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), and The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM III-R Axis II Personality Disorders. Results Thirty-six schizophrenia patients had at least one kind of comorbid personality disorder (72%) while 14 (28%) had not. Comparing the patients having personality disorders to the rest of our patient population, we have found no statistically significant differences in age groups, clinical variables and functioning. Discussion We have shown that approximately three fourths of our series accompanied by at least one type of personality disorders, a finding consolidating and concordant with some of the previous works.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".