MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119644549 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbu014

Symptom Dimensions of the Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales in Psychosis: A Multisite Study

2014· article· en· W2119644549 on OpenAlexafffund
Todd S. Woodward, Kwanghee Jung, Heungsun Hwang, John Yin, Laura D. Taylor, Mahesh Menon, Emmanuelle Peters, Elizabeth Kuipers, Flavie Waters, Tania Lecomte, Iris E. Sommer, Kirstin Daalman, Remko van Lutterveld, Daniela Hubl, Jochen Kindler, Philipp Homan, Johanna C. Badcock, Saruchi Chhabra, Matteo Cella, Sarah Keedy, Paul Allen, Andrea Mechelli, Antonio Preti, Sara Siddi, David H. Erickson

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsRoyal Columbian HospitalUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthKing's College LondonSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustMichael Smith Health Research BCCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMitacsNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer Research
KeywordsPsychologyDistressPsychosisRating scaleClinical psychologyStructural equation modelingAttributionSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Developmental psychologyPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Psychotic Symptom Rating Scales (PSYRATS) is an instrument designed to quantify the severity of delusions and hallucinations and is typically used in research studies and clinical settings focusing on people with psychosis and schizophrenia. It is comprised of the auditory hallucinations (AHS) and delusions subscales (DS), but these subscales do not necessarily reflect the psychological constructs causing intercorrelation between clusters of scale items. Identification of these constructs is important in some clinical and research contexts because item clustering may be caused by underlying etiological processes of interest. Previous attempts to identify these constructs have produced conflicting results. In this study, we compiled PSYRATS data from 12 sites in 7 countries, comprising 711 participants for AHS and 520 for DS. We compared previously proposed and novel models of underlying constructs using structural equation modeling. For the AHS, a novel 4-dimensional model provided the best fit, with latent variables labeled Distress (negative content, distress, and control), Frequency (frequency, duration, and disruption), Attribution (location and origin of voices), and Loudness (loudness item only). For the DS, a 2-dimensional solution was confirmed, with latent variables labeled Distress (amount/intensity) and Frequency (preoccupation, conviction, and disruption). The within-AHS and within-DS dimension intercorrelations were higher than those between subscales, with the exception of the AHS and DS Distress dimensions, which produced a correlation that approached the range of the within-scale correlations. Recommendations are provided for integrating these underlying constructs into research and clinical applications of the PSYRATS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations119
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207