MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The relationship of symptoms and level of functioning in schizophrenia to general wellbeing and the Quality of Life Scale

2000· article· en· W2018151906 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

VenueActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Scale (ratio)Schizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyClinical psychologyWell-beingNegative symptomPsychiatryGerontologyMedicinePsychosisPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Reports suggesting that quality of life in schizophrenia is more highly related to negative rather than positive symptoms are largely based on use of the Quality of Life Scale which was devised to assess deficit symptoms and does not include an assessment of subjective general wellbeing. In the current paper we examined symptoms, level of community functioning as well as living circumstances as correlates of Quality of Life Scale scores and scores on the General Well-Being Scale. METHOD: One hundred and twenty-eight patients completed the General Well-Being Scale and were rated on the Quality of Life Scale as well as scales assessing positive and negative symptoms. RESULTS: While negative symptoms, level of functioning and positive symptoms all were related to the scores on the Quality of Life Scale, General Well-Being Scale scores were primarily related to positive symptoms, particularly reality distortion. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the importance of recognizing the complex nature of the concept of quality of life. They demonstrate that varying indices of quality of life are likely to have different predictors.

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)0.001
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.264

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.282 · 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