Relationship between disability self-awareness and cognitive and daily living function in schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the relationship between disability self-awareness and cognitive and daily living functions in 49 patients with schizophrenia. The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS) self-report was used to identify patient-rated global function. A clinician-rated measure of global function was obtained using the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP); disability self-awareness was calculated using two global function scores. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms, while the MATRICS consensus cognitive battery (MCCB) and the UCSD Performance-based Skills Assessment (UPSA) were applied to assess cognitive and daily living functionality, respectively. The WHODAS scores correlated significantly with the MCCB verbal learning, visual learning, and social cognition domains, and with the UPSA communication domain. The PSP correlated significantly with all MCCB and UPSA domains. Disability self-awareness demonstrated positive correlation with most domains of MCCB and UPSA. The findings of this study indicate that the lower the cognitive and daily living function in patients with schizophrenia, the more positively they perceive their own disability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".