Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Schizophrenia is a mental illness that impacts multiple domains of a person's functioning therefore requiring multiple methods of treatment, which can become time consuming and costly. Horticultural therapy (HT) is a plant-based approach to reaching client goals and can do so in a holistic manner. Methods: A literature review was conducted in Google Scholar for “horticultural therapy” + “schizophrenia” and resulted in five relevant articles. These articles were evaluated through the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and assigned a quality score. Results: HT administration and measurement were done differently across studies, yet HT was found to improve functioning in multiple domains, including social, vocational, psychological, and neuropsychological. Conclusions: HT seems to be an effective approach to addressing client concerns in more than one domain. This suggests that HT may be a more affordable, integrative, and time-conscious intervention for people with schizophrenia. However, the studies reviewed were of low quality and make it unwise to draw definitive conclusions. Future studies should follow set standards for conducting and reporting research.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".