MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026540342 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbaa031.137

S71. CLINICAL, BEHAVIOURAL AND NEURAL VALIDATION OF THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE SYMPTOM SCALE (PANSS) AMOTIVATION FACTOR

2020· article· en· W3026540342 on OpenAlexaff
Mariia Kaliuzhna, Matthias Kirschner, Fabien Carruzzo, Matthias N. Hartmann-Riemer, Martin Bischof, Erich Seifritz, Philippe N. Tobler, Stefan Kaiser

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmotivationAnticipation (artificial intelligence)PsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Positive and Negative Syndrome ScaleClinical psychologyDevelopmental psychologyPsychiatryPsychosisSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are suggested to map onto two distinct factors – amotivation and diminished expression, which relate to different aspects of behaviour and neural activity. Most research in patients with schizophrenia is conducted with broad symptom assessment scales, such as the PANSS, for which factor solutions allowing the distinction between amotivation and diminished expression have only recently been reported. We aimed to establish whether the PANSS factor structure corresponds to the well-established two-factor structure of the Brief Negative Symptom Scale (BNSS) and whether it allows distinguishing specific behavioural and neuronal correlates of amotivation. Methods In study 1 (N=120) we examined the correlations between the PANSS factors and the BNSS factors. In study 2 (N=31) we examined whether PANSS amotivation is specifically associated with reduced willingness to work for reward in an effort-based decision making task. In study 3 (N=43) we investigated whether PANSS amotivation is specifically correlated with reduced ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation using functional magnetic resonance imaging. Results On the clinical level, the PANSS amotivation and diminished expression were highly correlated with their BNSS counterparts. On the behavioural level, PANSS amotivation factor but not the diminished expression factor was specifically associated with reduced willingness to invest effort to obtain a reward. On the neural level, PANSS amotivation was specifically associated with ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation. Discussion Our data confirm that the two domains of negative symptoms can be measured with the PANSS and are linked to specific aspects of behaviour and brain function. To our knowledge, this is the first study employing behavioural and neural measures to validate a new approach to clinical measurement of negative symptoms. Our results warrant a re-analysis of previous work that used the PANSS to further substantiate the distinction between the two factors in behavioural and neuroimaging studies.

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)0.004
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207