Cognitive Insight in Youth at Clinical High Risk of Psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction : Cognitive insight reflects one’s Self-Reflectiveness (recognition of dysfunctional reasoning, corrigibility) and Self-Certainty (overconfidence). In schizophrenia, lower Self-Reflectiveness and higher Self-Certainty has been associated with severity of symptoms and poor functioning. There is some evidence that lower Self-Reflectiveness and higher Self-Certainty are associated with attenuated symptoms in youth at clinical high risk (CHR) of psychosis. The present study evaluated in a CHR sample the relationship between cognitive insight and attenuated symptoms, current functioning, and evaluated change in cognitive insight at baseline and 1-month follow-up. Methods: Twenty-four individuals at CHR of psychosis completed the Beck Cognitive Insight Scale. Attenuated psychotic symptoms were assessed with the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms and functioning with the Global Functioning Social and Role scales. A subset of the sample completed the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia. Self-Reflectiveness, Self-Certainty, and Composite Index scores were correlated with clinical and functional variables. In addition, cognitive insight levels were compared at baseline and 1-month follow-up. Results: Trends were observed toward both increased attenuated perceptual abnormalities/hallucinations and higher Self-Reflectiveness, and increased avolition and increased Self-Reflectiveness. Cognitive insight did not significantly correlate with social or role functioning, or depression. Cognitive insight scores did not significantly differ between baseline and 1-month follow-up. Discussion: These findings provide little evidence for a relation between cognitive insight and clinical and functional variables in CHR, and suggest that cognitive insight remains stable over a 1-month time period in our sample. These data add to a growing body of literature on cognitive insight across the schizophrenia spectrum.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".