MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2908591297 · doi:10.2147/ndt.s190381

<p>Negative and positive self-thoughts predict subjective quality of life in people with schizophrenia</p>

2019· article· en· W2908591297 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tomoya Takeda, Masahito Nakataki, Masashi Ohta, Sayo Hamatani, Kanae Matsuura, Reona Yoshida, Naomi Kameoka, Takeo Tominaga, Hidehiro Umehara, Makoto Kinoshita, Shinya Watanabe, Shusuke Numata, Satsuki Sumitani, Tetsuro Ohmori

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Quality of life (healthcare)CognitionPositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleMedicineClinical psychologyPsychosocialDepression (economics)PsychiatryPsychologyPsychosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Recently, cognitive variables such as negative and positive self-belief and thoughts have attracted much attention because they are associated with functional outcomes and quality of life (QOL). However, it is unclear how cognitive variables affect subjective and objective QOL. This study aimed to investigate the relationship of negative and positive self-belief and thoughts with subjective and objective QOL. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Thirty-six people with schizophrenia participated in this study. Subjective and objective QOL were assessed with the Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale (SQLS) and Quality of Life Scale (QLS), respectively. Neurocognitive function was assessed with the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS). Clinical symptoms were assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia. Side effects were assessed with the Drug-induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS). Negative and positive self-belief and thoughts were assessed with the Defeatist Performance Belief Scale and Automatic Thoughts Questionnaire-Revised. A generalized linear model was tested, with subjective and objective QOL as the response variable and symptoms, neurocognitive function, and cognitive variables that were significantly correlated with subjective and objective QOL as explanatory variables. RESULTS: In the schizophrenia group, the common objects score on the QLS was predicted by the composite BACS score, and the total QLS score was predicted by the DIEPSS score. Motivation and Energy, Psychosocial, and Symptoms and Side effects scores on the SQLS were predicted by depression and by negative automatic thought (NAT) and positive automatic thought (PAT). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that key targets for improving objective and subjective QOL in people with schizophrenia are side effects, neurocognitive function, depression, and NAT and PAT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric Disease and TreatmentSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207