Clinical aspects of super-refractory schizophrenia: a 6-month cohort observational study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Approximately 30% of treatment-resistant schizophrenic patients do not fully respond to Clozapine and such patients are termed Clozapine non-responders or super-refractory schizophrenics. The aim of this study was to characterize patients with super-refractory schizophrenia according to demographic and psychopathological variables, as compared with patients with refractory schizophrenia or non-refractory subjects. METHOD: One hundred two outpatients meeting DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia were followed-up for 6 months. Subjects were classified into 3 groups: non-refractory (n=25), refractory (n=43) and super-refractory (n=34). Psychopathology was assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, the Schedule for Deficit Syndrome, the Calgary Depression Scale and the Quality of Life Scale. Patients were rated at 2-month intervals. RESULTS: Higher levels of severity at the disease onset as well as higher severity of positive symptoms were found to be predictive of super-refractoriness. CONCLUSIONS: The super-refractory schizophrenia patients have psychopathological predictive factors that need studies comparing brain images, genetical features and other clinical comparisons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it