Participation in daily life of people with schizophrenia in comparison to the general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Participation in occupations is a basic human right. Although people with schizophrenia commonly experience restrictions in participation, there is a paucity of research in this area. PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the participation patterns of people with schizophrenia to people without mental illness (control group). METHOD: A total of 140 people of similar age and sex completed the Adults Subjective Assessment of Participation and provided demographic and health-related data. FINDINGS: People with schizophrenia tend to participate in fewer activities and to participate alone. However, they participate with similar intensity as those in the control group. IMPLICATIONS: The participation patterns of people with schizophrenia are both unique and similar to those of the general population. The differences in participation raise concerns due to signs of restriction and social exclusion. However, it appears that people with schizophrenia benefit from occupation and community-based services that promote and support participation with others in diverse activities.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".