Correlates of frequent gambling and gambling-related chasing behaviors in individuals with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and aims Published research on the relationship between disordered gambling and schizophrenia is limited. However, existing data suggest that individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder may have a high prevalence of co-occurring disordered gambling. As such, effective strategies for screening and assessing gambling-related problems in individuals with psychosis are needed. The goal of this study was to explore the correlates of increased gambling frequency and chasing behavior, a hallmark feature of gambling disorder, in a sample of individuals with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorders. Methods Data from 336 participants who met DSM-IV criteria for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were used to examine differences between non-gamblers, infrequent gamblers, frequent gamblers who do not report chasing, and frequent gamblers who report chasing on a variety of associated features and symptoms of schizophrenia and disordered gambling. Results and discussion The results of the study support the conclusion that chasing behavior in individuals with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder lies on a continuum of severity, with more frequent gamblers endorsing greater chasing. Chasing was also associated with indicators of lower functioning across co-occurring disorders, such as greater problems with alcohol and drugs, greater gambling involvement, and a family history of gambling problems. The findings from the study suggest the utility of screening for chasing behavior as a brief and efficient strategy for assessing risk of gambling problems in individuals with psychotic-spectrum disorders.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it