Family History of Schizophrenia and the Relationship of Stress to Symptoms: Preliminary Findings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It has been hypothesized that patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia who have a positive family history for schizophrenia will show greater reactivity of their symptoms to increasing levels of stress or negative affect than will patients without such a family history. In the past this hypothesis has only been tested through manipulations of negative affect in laboratory settings. In this paper we test this hypothesis using longitudinal clinical data. METHOD: Data were derived from an earlier longitudinal study using monthly assessments of daily stressors (Hassles Scale) and symptom measures (the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms and the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms). We compared longitudinal stress to symptom relations in 12 patients with schizophrenia for whom a positive family history of schizophrenia could be identified with 12 matched schizophrenic patients without any known family history of psychiatric illness. RESULTS: There was evidence that patients with a family history of schizophrenia demonstrated a stronger relation between stress and total score on the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms. This difference appears to have primarily reflected a greater reactivity to stress of reality distortion symptoms in the positive family history group. The two groups did not differ in apparent reactivity to stress of the disorganization and psychomotor poverty dimensions of symptomatology. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide support from a naturalistic, longitudinal clinical study for the hypothesis that reactivity to stress of some symptoms of schizophrenia may vary as a function of family history of the disorder.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".