Comparison of four scales measuring depression in schizophrenic inpatients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several scales have been used to diagnose and evaluate depression in schizophrenia. However, the association between different depression scales and between depression scales and negative symptoms has not been studied adequately. Sixty-four consecutively admitted schizophrenic patients to Eginition Hospital, Department of Psychiatry, Athens, were assessed on the following scales: the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), the Expanded Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Depression subscale (EBPRS-D), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Depression subscale (PANSS-D) and the Negative Symptoms subscale (PANSS-N). The depression scales were found to be highly intercorrelated with the exception of the comparison between the EBPRS-D and the PANSS-D. Out of the four depression scales studied, only CDSS and EBPRS-D can discriminate between depression and a PANSS-Negative Symptoms subscale score or negative item scores.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".