Longitudinal assessment of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in Sardinian psychotic patients (LABSP): a protocol for a prospective observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) plays a crucial role in neurodevelopment, synaptic plasticity and neuronal function and survival. Serum and plasma BDNF levels are moderately, but consistently, decreased in patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) compared with healthy controls. There is a lack of knowledge, however, on the temporal manifestation of this decline. Clinical, illness course and treatment factors might influence the variation of BDNF serum levels in patients with psychosis. In this context, we propose a longitudinal study of a cohort of SCZ and schizophrenic and schizoaffective disorder (SAD) Sardinian patients with the aim of disentangling the relationship between peripheral BDNF serum levels and changes of psychopathology, cognition and drug treatments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Longitudinal assessment of BDNF in Sardinian psychotic patients (LABSP) is a 24-month observational prospective cohort study. Patients with SAD will be recruited at the Psychiatry Research Unit of the Department of Medical Science and Public Health, University of Cagliari and University of Cagliari Health Agency, Cagliari, Italy. We will collect BDNF serum levels as well as sociodemographic, psychopathological and neurocognitive measures. Structured, semistructured and self-rating assessment tools, such as the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale for psychopathological measures and the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia for cognitive function, will be used. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved by the University of Cagliari Health Agency Ethics Committee (NP2016/5491). The study will be conducted in accordance with the principles of good clinical practice, in the Declaration of Helsinki in compliance with the regulations. Participation will be voluntary and written informed consent will be obtained for each participant upon entry into the study. We plan to disseminate the results of our study through conference presentations and publication in international peer-reviewed journals. Access to raw data will be available in anonymised form upon request to the corresponding author.
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 | 0.020 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
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".