Insight in first episode psychosis: who is measuring what?
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
AIMS: To compare different self-administered or clinician-rated insight scales in an FEP population. METHODS: A self-administered measure (Beck Cognitive Insight Scale - BCIS) and clinician-rated scales (Scale of Unawareness of Mental Disorder - SUMD and Positive And Negative Symptoms Scale - PANSS-G12 insight item) were completed by 38 patients with a diagnosis of FEP. RESULTS: The scales had good internal consistency and only the clinician-rated scales were intercorrelated (SUMD - awareness of mental disorder and PANSS-G12 items (r=0.657, P<0.001)). Moreover, we observed a significant association of SUMD and PANSS positive and general subscales and a trend association for BCIS and PANSS negative subscale. CONCLUSION: Differential associations observed between insight and symptoms may suggest different clinical predictive values for each measure. Our results suggest the necessity to qualify the term 'insight' when discussing research results, most notably with respect to who is rating and what aspect of insight is being rated.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it