The Global Functioning: Social and Role Scales—Further Validation in a Large Sample of Adolescents and Young Adults at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Traditional measures for assessing functioning with adult patients with schizophrenia have been shown to be insufficient for assessing the issues that occur in adolescents and young adults at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis. The current study provides an expanded validation of the Global Functioning: Social (GF:Social) and Role (GF:Role) scales developed specifically for use with CHR individuals and explores the reliability and accuracy of the ratings, the validity of the scores in comparison to other established clinical measures, stability of functioning over a 2-year period, and psychosis predictive ability. METHODS: Seven hundred fifty-five CHR individuals and 277 healthy control (HC) participants completed the GF:Social and Role scales at baseline as part of the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS2). RESULTS: Inter-rater reliability and accuracy were high for both scales. Correlations between the GF scores and other established clinical measures demonstrated acceptable convergent and discriminant validity. In addition, GF:Social and Role scores were unrelated to positive symptoms. CHR participants showed large impairments in social and role functioning over 2-years, relative to the HCs, even after adjusting for age, IQ, and attenuated positive symptoms. Finally, social decline prior to baseline was more pronounced in CHR converters, relative to non-converters. CONCLUSIONS: The GF scales can be administered in a large-scale multi-site study with excellent inter-rater reliability and accuracy. CHR individuals showed social and role functioning impairments over time that were not confounded by positive symptom severity levels. The results of this study demonstrate that social decline is a particularly effective predictor of conversion outcome.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".