Investigation of the efficacy of a psychiatric-social rehabilitation performed on individuals with schizophrenia in a community mental health center: Controlled study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The holistic approach in schizophrenia treatment recommends the practice of psychosocial treatments in addition to medical treatment. In the present study we aimed to assess the effectiveness of psychosocial rehabilitation (psychosocial rehabilitation and pharmacotherapy) and care requirements performed in a Community Mental Health Center (CMHC) compared with patients treated as usual (pharmacotherapy) in the outpatient clinic. Methods: The study included patients who were regularly followed up because of schizophrenia for at least one year in CMHCs (n=100) and polyclinics (n=50). A Sociodemographic Data Form was used to question housing, economic status, working and social rights, and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Functioning Assessment Short Test, Schedule for Assessing the Three Components of Insight, and the Medication Adherence Rating Scale were applied to both groups, and the Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview was administered to caregivers. Results: Although there was no difference regarding sociodemographic variables between the groups, the caregiver burden was higher in the polyclinic group. Lower scores indicating significant difference in the CMHC group in positive and negative symptoms, were similar for depression, and a positively significant difference was detected in functionality, insight, and adherence to treatment. The CMHC group was found to be better in autonomy, cognitive functionality, and spare time activities in functionality areas; however, patients were found as similar regarding occupational functionality, financial issues, and interpersonal relations. Conclusion: The term recovery in schizophrenia currently relates with patients having a role in society, improving independent life skills, and contributing to production by working. We detected the positive effect of CMHC practices in primary (functionality, insight, adherence to treatment, caregiver burden) and secondary (positive, negative schizophrenia symptoms) outcome indicators. However, no difference was detected in the areas of occupational functionality and interpersonal relations. The results are important because they emphasize the importance of concentrating on the improvement of independent life skills, particularly professional adaptation in adaptive studies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".