MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791863388 · doi:10.1503/jpn.180038

Inefficient neural system stabilization: a theory of spontaneous resolutions and recurrent relapses in psychosis

2019· review· en· W2791863388 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Lena Palaniyappan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychosisSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyPopulationNeurosciencePsychiatryFeature (linguistics)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A striking feature of psychosis is its heterogeneity. Presentations of psychosis vary from transient symptoms with no functional consequence in the general population to a tenacious illness at the other extreme, with a wide range of variable trajectories in between. Even among patients with schizophrenia, who are diagnosed on the basis of persistent deterioration, marked variation is seen in response to treatment, frequency of relapses and degree of eventual recovery. Existing theoretical accounts of psychosis focus almost exclusively on how symptoms are initially formed, with much less emphasis on explaining their variable course. In this review, I present an account that links several existing notions of the biology of psychosis with the variant clinical trajectories. My aim is to incorporate perspectives of systems neuroscience in a staging framework to explain the individual variations in illness course that follow the onset of psychosis.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207