Depression and subjective quality of life in chronic phase schizophrenic patients
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of depression on subjective quality of life in schizophrenic patients. METHOD: Sixty-seven schizophrenic patients in a stabilized phase were included. Schizophrenic symptoms were evaluated using the Positive and Negative Symptoms Scale (PANSS). The subjective quality of life was evaluated using the short version of the Lehman quality of life scale (QoLI). Depression was evaluated using the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) and extrapyramidal effects with the Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale (ESRS). RESULTS: The PANSS total score, PANSS general psychopathology subscore, PANSS depression factor, the total CDSS and some ESRS scores were negatively correlated with the overall life satisfaction score. The CDSS score was negatively correlated with all except one QoLI score. QoLI scores were significantly lower in depressed patients, and this result remained consistent for four QoLi dimensions when adjusted on ESRS and PANSS scores. When analysing the association between high depression scores and high parkinsonism scores with reduced quality of life, multivariate analysis showed that depression was the main explanatory factor: the CDSS total score explained 22% of the variance of the overall subjective quality of life score. The patient questionnaire at the ESRS explained 10.5% of the variance of the 'mental and physical health' QoLI score. CONCLUSION: In schizophrenic patients, depressive symptoms should be focused because of their strong association to overall subjective quality of life.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it