The Relationship of Neurocognition and Negative Symptoms to Social and Role Functioning Over Time in Individuals at Clinical High Risk in the First Phase of the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Impaired social, role, and neurocognitive functioning are preillness characteristics of people who later develop psychosis. In people with schizophrenia, neurocognition and negative symptoms are associated with functional impairment. We examined the relative contributions of neurocognition and symptoms to social and role functioning over time in clinically high-risk (CHR) individuals and determined if negative symptoms mediated the influence of cognition on functioning. METHODS: Social, role, and neurocognitive functioning and positive, negative, and disorganized symptoms were assessed in 167 individuals at CHR for psychosis in the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study Phase 1 (NAPLS-1), of whom 96 were reassessed at 12 months. RESULTS: Regression analyses indicated that negative symptoms accounted for unique variance in social and role functioning at baseline and follow-up. Composite neurocognition accounted for unique, but modest, variance in social and role functioning at baseline and in role functioning at follow-up. Negative symptoms mediated the relationship between composite neurocognition and social and role functioning across time points. In exploratory analyses, individual tests (IQ estimate, Digit Symbol/Coding, verbal memory) selectively accounted for social and role functioning at baseline and follow-up after accounting for symptoms. When negative symptom items with content overlapping with social and role functioning measures were removed, the relationship between neurocognition and social and role functioning was strengthened. CONCLUSION: The modest overlap among neurocognition, negative symptoms, and social and role functioning indicates that these domains make substantially separate contributions to CHR individuals.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".