MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794487806 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sby016.387

T111. PANSS NEGATIVE SYMPTOM DIMENSIONS ACROSS GEOGRAPHICAL REGIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL, LINGUISTIC AND CULTURAL CONSISTENCY

2018· article· en· W2794487806 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lora E. Liharska, Philip Harvey, Alexandra S. Atkins, Richard S.E. Keefe, Danny Ulshen

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyExperiential learningConsistency (knowledge bases)Cross-cultural studiesConstruct (python library)Social psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recognizing the discrete dimensions that underlie negative symptoms in schizophrenia and how these dimensions are conceptualized across geographical regions may result in better understanding and treatment. The expressive-experiential distinction has been shown to have vast importance in relation to functional outcomes in schizophrenia. Previous studies have shown that the PANSS may not be equivalently rated across counties and cultures, suggesting regional differences in both symptom expression and rater judgment of symptom severity. Items that perform in markedly different ways across demographic, regional, cultural, or clinical severity characteristics may not offer valid representations of the target construct. 1) Will the expressive and experiential dimensions of the PANSS vary over 15 geographical regions and will the item ratings defining each dimension manifest similar reliability across these regions? 2) In large multi-center, international trials where data are combined, which of the two dimensions are disposed to social, linguistic and cultural inconsistency? Data was obtained for the baseline PANSS visits of 6,889 subjects. Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), we examined whether the expressive-experiential distinction would be replicated in our sample. We investigated the validity of the expressive-experiential distinction using Differential Item Functioning (DIF; Mantel-Haenszel) across 15 geographical regions – South America-Mexico, Austria-Germany, Belgium-Netherlands, Brazil, Canada, Nordic regions (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden), France, Great Britain, India, Italy, Poland, Eastern Europe (Romania, Slovakia, Ukraine, Croatia, Estonia, Czech Republic), Russia, South Africa, and Spain - as compared to the United States. Expressive Deficit: More DIF was observed for items in the Expressive deficit factor than for items relating to experiential deficits. The following regions showed at least moderate to large DIF for all items: Austria-Germany, Nordic, France, and Poland. Of all the items, N3 Poor Rapport showed the most moderate and large DIF (n = 13; 86.67%) across countries, with 7 countries reporting large DIF. Similarly, N6 Lack of Spontaneity and Flow of Conversation showed moderate and large DIF for 66.67% countries (n=10). Experiential Deficit: Item G16 Active Social Avoidance reported negligible DIF for 14 of the 15 countries investigated (93.33%). Large DIF was observed for N2 Emotional Withdrawal and N4 Passive Apathetic Social Withdrawal for Brazil and India. Seven regions demonstrated no DIF across all items of the PANSS experiential deficit factor (South America-Mexico, Belgium-Netherlands, Nordic, Great Britain, Eastern Europe, Russia, and Spain). Overall, there were many fewer observed items with large DIF for PANSS experiential domain. These results suggest that the PANSS Negative Symptoms Factor can be better represented by a two-factor model than by a single-factor model. Additionally, the results show significant differences in ratings on the PANSS expressive items, but not the experiential items, across regions. This could be due to a lack of equivalence between the original and translated versions, cultural differences in the interpretation of items, rater training, or understanding of scoring anchors. Knowing which items are challenging for raters across regions can help guide PANSS training to improve results of international clinical trials aimed at negative symptoms.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.368 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207