MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039863486 · doi:10.1097/nmd.0b013e3181f9804c

Childhood Adversity, Mental Disorder Comorbidity, and Suicidal Behavior in Schizotypal Personality Disorder

2010· article· en· W2039863486 on OpenAlexafffund
Vanessa J. Lentz, Jennifer A. Robinson, Shay‐Lee Bolton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychiatryPersonality disordersComorbidityPsychologyBorderline personality disorderClinical psychologyAnxietySchizotypal personality disorderDepression (economics)Poison controlAlcohol use disorderPersonalityMedicinePsychosisAlcohol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Schizotypal personality disorder (SPD) is a serious and relatively common psychiatric disorder, yet remains understudied among the personality disorders. The current study examines the psychiatric correlates of SPD in a representative epidemiologic sample, utilizing data from the National Epidemiological Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (N = 34,653). Multiple logistic regression compared people with SPD to the general population across a broad range of childhood adversities, comorbid psychiatric disorders, and suicidal behavior. SPD was strongly associated with many adverse childhood experiences. After adjusting for confounding factors, SPD was independently associated with major depression and several anxiety disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder. Interestingly, SPD was more strongly associated with borderline and narcissistic personality disorders than cluster A personality disorders. Individuals with SPD were also more likely to attempt suicide. As a whole, these results suggest that individuals with SPD experience significant morbidity and may be at increased risk of mortality.

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 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations36
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Nervous and Mental DiseaseSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207