T50. DETERMINANTS OF OCCUPATIONAL RECOVERY IN RECENT-ONSET PSYCHOSIS: THE ROLE OF COGNITION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational recovery (i.e., job acquisition or return to school) is a common goal among people with recent-onset psychosis. Cognitive deficits have been reported to influence occupational recovery, but to date few studies have evaluated if cognitive deficits independently predict occupational recovery when taking into account other important determinants, such as self-esteem, motivation, length of time absent from employment/school, job/school search behaviours, subjective cognitive complaints and psychotic symptoms. Hence, this longitudinal study aimed to evaluate the role of cognition, as well as other key factors relevant to occupational recovery, to predict job occupational status six months after baseline in people with recent-onset psychosis. A total of 27 participants receiving treatment in rehabilitation programs were included in the study. Neuropsychological, psychological, clinical and occupational measures were administered at baseline, and occupational status was collected six months later. Ordinal regression indicated that working memory and length of time absent from employment/school at baseline predicted 48.1% of the variance of occupational status at six months, with both variables showing a unique significant contribution to the model. These results suggest that working memory could be integrated in comprehensive models of occupational recovery in people with recent-onset psychosis. In addition, supported employment and education programs could target cognitive deficits and length of time absent from employment/school to help these individuals to acquire a job or return to school given their strong predictive value on occupational recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".