S218. INSIGHT AND SUBJECTIVITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The awareness of mental disorder or insight refers to the ability to perceive the disorder itself and the symptoms, the effects of the treatment and the social consequences of the disorder; and also the ability to attribute the symptoms to a mental disorder. Lack of insight is frequent in schizophrenia and is associated with a low adherence to the treatment and to a worse evolution. A greater insight has been associated with a lower psychopathological severity and with higher levels of depression. On the other hand, subjective insight refers not only to what happens to the patient but also to how he feels and to the perception of the changes that he undergoes during the psychotic experience. The subjective perception of change is a position that can easily lead to connect with painful and depressive feelings, so it can be assumed that subjective insight could be related more consistently with the depressive symptoms than the clinical insight. Observational cross-sectional study of a group of 114 schizophrenia patients treated in the psychiatry devices of the Parc de Salut Mar and Parc Taulí Instruments: SUMD, Markova and Berrios Scale and Calgary scale for depression in psychosis. Subjective insight is significantly correlated with Lindenmayer’s depressive factor and depression level measured by a Calgary scale. Clinical insight correlates with positive and excitatory symptoms. The time of evolution explains the non-awareness of the social consequences of the disease. The subjective insight into schizophrenia is mainly related to the depressive symptoms. The clinical insight into schizophrenia is related to positive 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.010 |
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".