Re: Preferential Aggregation of Obsessive—Compulsive Spectrum Disorders in Schizophrenia Patients with OCD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dear Editor: Dr Michael Poyurovsky and coauthors1 reported on an interesting study in which they assessed the rates of psychiatric disorders in schizophrenia patients with and without obsessive-compulsive disorders (OCD) and pure OCD patients. Body dysmorphic disorder, tic disorders (TD), and anxiety disorders were found in higher frequencies in the schizo-obsessive group when compared to pure schizophrenia. The findings support the notion that the schizo-obssesive group may be an intermediate phenotype between schizophrenia and OCD. We would like to comment on the specific findings of TD. Curiously, the authors found no cases of Tourette syndrome in the schizo-obsessive group, while the odds of having chronic motor tics in the schizo-obsessive group (16%) were 4 times higher than those of the schizophrenia group (4%). In the OCD group, the frequency of TD was the classical 34.3% found in the literature.2 The intermediate frequency of TD in the schizo-obsessive group speaks for a continuum between these disorders. One explanation for these higher frequencies of obsessive spectrum disorders could be the presence of common vulnerability genes. There are few reports of Tourette patients who later developed schizophrenia and also few reports of TD in schizophrenia.3-5 The low frequency of TD in schizophrenia could be owing to a real low incidence of tic disorders in schizophrenia, the use of antipsychotics in schizophrenia patients that would mask tics when present, and tics that may be misdiagnosed as Stereotypie behaviors, tardive diskinesia, and other extrapiramidal symptoms that might also lead to an underestimation of TD frequencies.6 To rule out these factors, the authors could have informed medication use in the 3 groups of patients as well as the diagnostic criteria used to differentiate between several involuntary movement disorders. The age of onset of the disorder, used as a covariable, showed no difference between OCD and schizo-obsessive patients. This is another important factor that reinforces the hypothesis that schizo-obsessive, have a place between schizophrenia and OCD, sharing specific comorbidity patterns with both. References 1. Poyurovsky M, Fuchs C, Faragian S, et al. Preferential aggregation of obsessive-compulsive spectrum disorders in schizophrenia patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51(12):746-754 2. Miguel EC, Leckman JF, Rauch S, et al. Obsessive-compulsive disorder phenotypes: implications for genetic studies. Mol Psychiatry. 2005;10(3):258-275. 3. Muller N, Riedel M, Zawta W, et al. Comorbidity of Tourette's syndrome and schizophrenia-biological and psysiological parallels. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2002;26(7-8):1245-1252. 4. Wagle AC, Staley CJ. Gilles de la Tourette syndrome with schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder: a case report. J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1999;11(4):517. 5. Fennig S, Fennig S, Pomeroy J, et al. Developmental disorder, Tourette disorder and schizophrenia: a case study. Isr J Psychiatry Relat Sei. …
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 | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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".