SA31. The Validity of a Computer-Simulated Breakfast Cooking Task as a Predictor of Disability in Patients With Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients with schizophrenia experience deficits in multiple domains of functioning. Cognition is often considered a primary predictor of functioning in this population. Standard cognitive test batteries, however, do not always capture substantial variance in functional outcome. This may reflect inadequate sampling of functionality relevant cognitive processes. Tools that incorporate more functionally relevant stimuli may be useful in improving current assessment methods. The current study examines the incremental validity of a rehabilitation cognitive science measure, the Breakfast Task, in predicting disability relative to standard measures of cognition and symptom severity. Methods: Patients with schizophrenia (n = 33) and healthy controls (n = 37) completed the Breakfast Task, a computerized working memory and executive test that simulates cooking breakfast. Participants were required to start and stop cooking 5 foods with the goal of having all of the foods ready at the same time while simultaneously completing a table-setting task. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) Positive and Negative Symptom subscales and the Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI) Matrix Reasoning and Vocabulary subtests were administered to assess symptoms and intellectual functioning, respectively. Participants completed the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) to assess current disability. Group differences on Breakfast Task performance were first assessed. To determine the predictive validity of symptoms, intellectual functioning, and Breakfast Task performance, a hierarchical regression was carried out with predictors entered in the following order: (1) BPRS scores, (2) WASI t-scores, and (3) Breakfast Task scores, with WHODAS 2.0 summary scores as the dependent variable. Results: On the Breakfast Task, patients performed significantly worse than controls in their ability to ensure all 5 foods were completed at the same time (i.e., the Range score; U= 243, P = .001), reflecting working memory and planning deficits. Among patients, the Breakfast Task Range score added significant incremental validity to the prediction of WHODAS 2.0 summary scores, relative to symptoms and current intellectual functioning (Fchange(20) = 4.61, P = .04). The complete model accounted for 23.5% of the variance in disability scores. Conclusion: The Breakfast Task is relatively understudied in patients with schizophrenia. Results suggest that patients are impaired relative to controls on this simulated ecologically relevant task. Performance on this task increases the ability to predict disability beyond that provided by standard cognitive and symptom measures. Our results suggest potential utility of rehabilitation cognitive science measures such as the Breakfast Task in assessing and designing rehabilitation programs for patients with schizophrenia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".