Impact of primary negative symptoms on functional outcomes in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Negative symptoms are known to undermine functional outcomes in people with schizophrenia; however, most studies have not accounted for whether these symptoms were primary or secondary to other psychopathological factors. The present study examined the impact of primary negative symptoms on functional outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: The sample included 1427 patients with schizophrenia who completed the baseline visit in the CATIE study. Symptoms were assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Calgary Depression Scale, extrapyramidal side effects with the Simpson-Angus scale, and functional status with the Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life Scale. RESULTS: Negative symptoms were significantly and inversely related to each domain of functioning examined. These relationships remained after statistically controlling for the influence of potential sources of secondary negative symptoms. In addition, the relationships between negative symptoms and specific domains of functioning remained in patients who had mild/absent positive, depressive, anxiety and extrapyramidal symptoms. Negative symptoms were associated with functional outcomes even in antipsychotic-free patients. CONCLUSIONS: Primary negative symptoms significantly contribute to the functional impairment seen in people with schizophrenia. A better understanding of the etiology and pathobiology of these symptoms is required to guide the search for effective therapeutics that promote functional recovery.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".