A longitudinal examination of the moderating effects of symptoms on the relationship between functional competence and real world functional performance in Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many individuals with schizophrenia experience remission of prominent positive symptoms but continue to experience impairments in real world functioning. Residual negative and depressive symptoms may have a direct impact on functioning and impair patients' ability to use the cognitive and functional skills that they possess (competence) in the real world (functional performance). One hundred thirty-six individuals (100 men, 36 women) with schizophrenia were classified as having primarily positive symptoms, primarily negative symptoms, primarily depressive symptoms, or undifferentiated symptom profiles. Performance based measures of cognition and adaptive and interpersonal functional competence were used, along with ratings of real world behavior by high contact clinicians. Assessments were performed at baseline and at an 18-month follow-up. The relationships between neurocognition and capacity/performance were not moderated by symptom group ps > .091; neurocognition predicted capacity and performance for all groups ps < .001. The relationship between adaptive competence and adaptive performance was moderated by symptom group, ps < .01, such that baseline competence only predicted future performance ratings for participants with primarily positive or undifferentiated symptoms, and not for individuals with primarily negative or depressive symptoms. This same moderation effect was found on the relationship between interpersonal competence and interpersonal performance, ps < .002. Residual negative and depressive symptoms are distinct constructs that impede the use of functional skills in the real world. Depressive symptoms are often overlooked in schizophrenia but appear to be an important factor that limits the use of functional ability in real world environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".