Individuals developing schizophrenia are hidden among adolescent substance misusers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strategies are needed to identify youth developing schizophrenia. The present study aimed to determine whether adolescents treated for substance misuse were at elevated risk to develop schizophrenia, whether this risk has changed since the late 1960s, and whether substance misuse in adolescence predicted poorer outcomes through adulthood. METHOD: In a Swedish city, since the mid-1960s there has been only one clinic for adolescent substance misuse. Three samples from this clinic were studied: 1992 individuals treated from 1968 to 1971 followed to age 50 years; 1576 treated from 1980 to 1984 followed to age 35 years; and 180 treated in 2004 followed to age 22 years. Each clinical sample was matched on age, sex and place of birth to an equal, or larger, number of randomly selected individuals from the general population. Schizophrenia, substance use disorders, physical disorders related to substance misuse, criminal convictions, poverty and death were identified using national registers. RESULTS: Individuals treated for substance misuse in adolescence were at increased risk to subsequently develop schizophrenia: in males the increase was approximately four-fold and in females between five- and seven-fold. There was no difference in risk for those treated in 1968-1971 and from 1980 to 1984 when cannabis use increased from 37.6% to 49.8% of the clinical samples. Among males who developed schizophrenia, treatment for substance misuse was associated with increased risk of substance use disorders and criminal convictions through adulthood. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment programmes for adolescents misusing substances include a disproportionate number developing schizophrenia. Early detection and treatment have the potential to improve long-term outcomes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".