MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602492646 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbx024.046

SU48. A Comparison of Psychotic Symptoms in Subjects With Cocaine or Methamphetamine Dependence vs Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder

2017· article· en· W2602492646 on OpenAlexaff
Peter D. Alexander, Kristina M. Gicas, Taylor S. Willi, Clara Kim, Veronika Boyeva, Ric M. Procyshyn, Geoff Smith, Allen E. Thornton, William J. Panenka, Andrea A. Jones, Fidel Vila‐Rodriguez, Olga Leonova, Donna J. Lang, William MacEwan, William G. Honer, Alasdair M. Barr

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Schizoaffective disorderPsychologyMethamphetaminePsychiatryPsychosisCocaine dependenceAnxietyClinical psychologyCannabisMedicineInternal medicineAddiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The psychostimulant drugs, cocaine and methamphetamine, are potent, indirect dopamine receptor agonists. Sustained use of high doses of these drugs can result in psychotic symptoms in a large proportion of individuals. However, there is a shortage of information about how this type of drug-induced psychosis compares to the psychotic symptoms associated with schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The aim of the present study was to compare psychotic symptoms in cocaine- or methamphetamine-dependent subjects vs subjects with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder, in a cohort living in a common environment. Methods: We recruited 153 subjects meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for cocaine dependence, 38 with methamphetamine dependence, and 57 with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Psychotic symptoms were assessed with the PANSS and analyzed using a 5-factor model (positive, negative, disorganized, excitement, and anxiety/depression factors). All participants were also assessed for physical and mental illnesses as well as recent substance use. Results: For total PANSS scores, the cocaine (65.6 ± 14.5) and methamphetamine (70.8 ± 15.3) dependent groups did not differ significantly, but the schizophrenia spectrum group was notably more psychotic (87.8 ± 20.7) (P < .001). Comparing the groups on the 5 separate factors, significant differences were only observed on the positive, negative, and disorganized subscales, in which the schizophrenia spectrum subjects were the most psychotic, followed by the methamphetamine-dependent group. The groups differed on a number of other variables, including age (cocaine group older), HIV/HCV infection (more common in cocaine group), and cannabis dependence (less common in cocaine group). Conclusion: In the present study, we have directly compared psychotic symptoms in 2 different types of psychostimulant dependence and schizophrenia spectrum disorders, with individuals who cohabit a shared environment. The schizophrenia spectrum group was markedly more psychotic, which was reflected in greater severity of positive, negative, and disorganized symptoms. While groups differed across a number of different demographic and substance use variables, those were unlikely to account for the large difference in psychotic symptoms between the groups. In the present cohort, schizophrenia spectrum disorders are therefore associated with greater psychotic symptoms than cocaine or methamphetamine dependence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207