Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have explored the Quality of Life among patients with schizophrenia In the treatment of schizophrenia the subjective quality of life is an important outcome. AIM OF THE STUDY: To determine the quality of life in patients with schizophrenia in Indian population, and to compare it with individuals without mental illness in general population. This study aimed to identify factors which influenced the quality of life in patients with schizophrenia. METHODOLOGY: This was a Cross sectional study in the Institute of Mental health- a Teaching institute and tertiary care referral centre involving WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire to evaluate the quality of life. Further Positive and negative syndrome scale, Calgary depressive scale for schizophrenia, Beck’s cognitive insight scale, WHODAS-II scale, UKU side effects scale, Social support questionnaire were all employed to study the psychopathology, insight, side effects and social support in the patient group. Descriptive statistics and tests of correlation, multivariate analysis using SPSS software-20 were performed. RESULTS: The quality of life in patients with schizophrenia was found to be lower than the individuals without mental illness. The variables which showed a strong association with quality of life in these patients were gender, age, employment, socio economic background, education, duration and phase of illness. Depression and negative symptoms had a strong correlation with quality of life. Disability and insight also influenced the quality of life. CONCLUSION: It was concluded that it is imperative to study the quality of life in patients with schizophrenia. Depressive and negative symptoms has to be catered to decrease lowering of quality of life. Early treatment and reduction of symptoms also is important an increased duration and active phase of illness causes a decline in quality of life. Disability prevention by early recovery and rehabilitation measures is very important to increase the treatment outcome and thereby the quality of life. The knowledge of these factors in these patients should be crucial to implement health policies and psychosocial rehabilitation programs focused on improving the quality of life of these patients.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".