The effect of Avoidant Personality Disorder on the persistence of Generalized Social Anxiety Disorder in the general population: results from a longitudinal, nationally representative mental health survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to prospectively examine the role of Avoidant Personality Disorder (AvPD) as a determinant in the outcome of Generalized Social Anxiety Disorder (GSAD) using Wave 2 of the National Epidemiologic Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions 3 years later. METHOD: This study analyzed data from Waves 1 and 2 of the NESARC (n = 34,653). GSAD was operationalized based on the DSM-IV definitions of this SAD subtype. RESULTS: Logistic regression analyses indicated that AvPD significantly predicted the persistence of GSAD, even after adjusting for a number of important sociodemographic variables and other psychiatric comorbidity. AvPD did not significantly predict outcome in non-generalized SAD. CONCLUSIONS: AvPD can influence the course of GSAD in adulthood. Specific personality dimensions may underlie and explain the similarities between AvPD and GSAD. Self-criticism could be a shared feature of both AvPD and GSAD and could represent an important psychological marker of poor prognosis in comorbid GSAD and AvPD.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".