Impaired Olfactory Identification in Relatives of Patients With Familial Schizophrenia
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: Impaired olfactory identification ability has previously been demonstrated in patients with schizophrenia. This study assessed olfactory function in psychotic and nonpsychotic members of multigenerational families with familial schizophrenia to determine whether deficits were present in both groups. METHOD: The University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test was administered birhinally to three groups of subjects aged less than 65 years: 19 psychotic and 27 nonpsychotic members of families with familial schizophrenia and 43 age- and sex-matched healthy volunteers. RESULTS: Nonpsychotic family members had significantly higher mean University of Pennsylvania Smell Identification Test scores than psychotic family members but were impaired relative to the healthy volunteer group. These group differences could not be accounted for by age, sex, or smoking habit. Fifty-eight percent of the psychotic and 34% of the nonpsychotic family members performed in the microsmic (impaired) range, compared to 9% of the healthy volunteers. CONCLUSIONS: Impaired olfactory deficits may aggregate in families with schizophrenia and may be indicative of a genetic predisposition to psychosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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