Comorbidity and pathophysiology of obsessive–compulsive disorder in schizophrenia: Is there evidence for a schizo-obsessive subtype of schizophrenia?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiologic and neurobiologic evidence suggests that patients with comorbid obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and schizophrenia may represent a special category among patients with schizophrenia. Efforts to examine the neurobiology of this group have focused on neuroimaging studies and neuropsychologic testing. Convergent evidence suggests that there may be a specific pattern of neurobiologic dysfunction in this subgroup of patients accounting for symptom co-expression. This review indicates that future studies should distinguish among (1) apparent obsessive-compulsive symptoms (OCS) that occur only in the context of psychosis and that may overlap with psychotic phenomenology, representing a forme fruste of psychosis; (2) OCS occurring only in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia; (3) neuroleptic-induced OCS or OCD; and (4) OCS or frank OCD occurring concurrently with schizophrenia. We examine the evidence for a putative schizo-obsessive disorder and outline suggestions for identifying OCS in the presence of 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".