Prevalence and relationship to delusions and hallucinations of anxiety disorders in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the prevalence of anxiety disorders in a sample of individuals with chronic schizophrenia, controlling for anxiety symptoms that may be related to delusions and hallucinations, and the possible differences in clinical variables between the groups. Individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and able to give informed consent were recruited from the community. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) was administered to both confirm the DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia and screen for comorbid anxiety disorders. If a comorbid anxiety disorder was found, its relation to the individual's delusions and hallucinations was examined. Clinical rating scales for schizophrenia were administered as well as rating scales for specific anxiety disorders where appropriate. Overall, anxiety disorders ranged from 0% [ for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)] to 26.7% [ for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and agoraphobia without panic] with lower rates when controlled for anxiety symptoms related to delusions and hallucinations. In investigating clinical variables, the cohort was initially divided into schizophrenics with no anxiety disorders and those with an anxiety disorder; with further analyses including schizophrenics with anxiety disorders related to delusions and hallucinations and those with anxiety disorders not related to delusions and hallucinations. The most consistent difference between all the groups was on the PANSS-G subscale. No significant differences were found on the remaining clinical variables. Comorbid anxiety disorders in schizophrenia can be related to the individual's delusions and hallucinations, though anxiety disorders can occur exclusive of these positive symptoms. Clinicians must be aware that this comorbidity exists in order to optimize an individual's treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".