Trajectories of cognitive development during adolescence among youth at‐risk for schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Among adults with schizophrenia, evidence suggests that premorbid deficits in different cognitive domains follow distinct developmental courses during childhood and adolescence. The aim of this study was to delineate trajectories of adolescent cognitive functions prospectively among different groups of youth at-risk for schizophrenia, relative to their typically developing (TD) peers. METHOD: Using linear mixed models adjusted for sex, ethnicity, parental occupation and practice effects, cognitive development between ages 9 and 16 years was compared for youth characterised by a triad of well-replicated developmental antecedents of schizophrenia (ASz; N = 32) and youth with a least one affected relative with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (FHx; N = 29), relative to TD youth (N = 45). Participants completed measures of IQ, scholastic achievement, memory and executive function at three time-points, separated by approximately 24-month intervals. RESULTS: Compared to TD youth, both ASz and FHx youth displayed stable developmental deficits in verbal working memory and inhibition/switching executive functions. ASz youth additionally presented with stable deficits in measures of vocabulary (IQ), word reading, numerical operations, and category fluency executive function, and a slower rate of growth (developmental lag) on spelling from 9 to 16 years than TD peers. Conversely, faster rates of growth relative to TD peers (developmental delay) were observed on visual and verbal memory, and on category fluency executive function (ASz youth only) and on matrix reasoning (IQ) and word reading (FHx youth only). CONCLUSIONS: These differential patterns of deviation from normative adolescent cognitive development among at-risk youth imply potential for cognitive rehabilitation targeting of specific cognitive deficits at different developmental phases.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".