Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cognitive impairment is known to occur in schizophrenia, and may be marked in institutionalised patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether it ever warrants an additional diagnosis of dementia. METHODS: A population of chronic schizophrenic patients who were aged 65 or younger and showed no organic risk factors for dementia were screened for presence of disorientation. Any showing this underwent neuropsychological testing, physical investigations, and structural and functional neuroimaging. Information about day to day cognitive function was also obtained from carers. RESULTS: Eight patients aged 28 to 64 were identified who showed disorientation; in all cases this was accompanied by general intellectual impairment and objective evidence of a dementia syndrome. The patients' schizophrenic symptoms were unexceptional and did not seem sufficient to account for their cognitive impairment. Neuropsychological testing disclosed relative sparing of visual and visuospatial function and language syntax, but pervasive deficits in memory and executive function. Brain CT demonstrated only minor abnormalities but most of the patients showed frontal or temporal hypoperfusion on SPECT. CONCLUSIONS: Dementia in schizophrenia seems to be a real entity with a neuropsychological signature similar to that of frontotemporal dementia. Functional but not structural imaging abnormalities may also be characteristic.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".