A study on negative and depressive symptom prevalence in individuals at ultra‐high risk for psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Negative symptoms are known to be present in the prodromal stage of psychotic disorders, yet little is known about their prevalence. Studies examining the presence of negative symptoms in ultra-high risk (UHR) populations have shown some limitations, notably failing to control depression. The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence of negative symptoms in the presence of significant levels of depression and in the absence of such symptoms (primary negative symptoms) over 1 year and to examine differences in negative symptoms in psychosis converters and non-converters. METHODS: Participants were 123 individuals at UHR for the development of psychosis receiving follow-up for a period of 2 years. Negative symptoms and depression were measured using the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale at baseline, 6 and 12 months post-admission. RESULTS: At baseline, the prevalence of negative symptoms and primary negative symptoms was 76.4% and 32.7%, respectively. Whereas the prevalence of negative symptoms was significantly decreased at 6 months, the prevalence of primary negative symptoms was similar at all time points. Negative symptoms at baseline were not different between later converters and non-converters to psychosis. CONCLUSION: Our findings confirm the presence of secondary and primary negative symptoms in individuals at UHR, but suggest a differential trajectory of both measures over time. Future studies should include larger UHR groups and focus on the investigation of intra-individual changes in primary negative symptoms over time and further explore their potential role for psychosis conversion.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".