MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical issues related to depression in schizophrenia: an international survey of psychiatrists

2002· article· en· W2014381581 on OpenAlexaff
Donald Addington, Jean‐Michel Azorin, Ian R. H. Falloon, Jes Gerlach, S.R. Hirsch, Samuel G. Siris

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychiatryDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsMedicineDescriptive statisticsClinical psychologyPsychologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Depressive symptoms in schizophrenia are associated with a substantial morbidity and mortality burden. The 'International Survey of Depression in Schizophrenia' was designed to evaluate current awareness and clinical approaches in this area. METHOD: A 48-item questionnaire was distributed to approximately 80 000 consultant psychiatrists world-wide. Responses were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Respondents demonstrated considerable awareness of the prevalence and consequences of depression in schizophrenia. Although there was widespread adjunctive use of antidepressants, one-third of respondents indicated that they rarely or never prescribe these agents in combination with antipsychotic medication. There were considerable variations in opinions about the best approach to the treatment of depressive symptoms associated with schizophrenia. CONCLUSION: The considerable clinical burden of depressive symptomatology in schizophrenia was acknowledged by the majority of respondents to this survey. There was, however, little agreement on the best management strategy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations53
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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