Cross-Cutting Symptom Domains Predict Functioning in Psychotic Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Previous research shows elevated disability in psychotic disorders. However, co-occurring symptomatology has been increasingly highlighted as predictive of clinical outcomes in the psychotic spectrum. The current study investigates how both psychotic and nonpsychotic symptom domains predict functioning across psychotic disorders. METHODS: Outpatients (N = 128) with psychotic spectrum diagnoses participated in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) Field Trials at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto, Canada, in 2011, including the repeated administration of "cross-cutting" brief screening measures that assessed internalizing (eg, anxiety, depression), substance use (eg, alcohol, psychoactive drug use), and psychotic symptoms. Level of functioning was also assessed by self-report and clinician-rated World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHO-DAS-II). The relation between symptom domains and disability was examined concurrently and prospectively via hierarchical regression. RESULTS: Psychosis was strongly linked to self-reported disability when considered in isolation (β = 0.22, P < .001; R2 = 0.11). However, when all 3 symptom domains were included in analyses, internalizing symptoms were the strongest concurrent (β = 0.31, P < .001; R2 = 0.17) and prospective (β = 0.29, P < .001; R2 = 0.15) predictor of disability. In the concurrent model, an interaction between internalizing and substance use emerged, wherein high internalizing symptoms were particularly detrimental in persons with high levels of substance use (β = 0.08, P < .05; R2 = 0.014). Results were similar for clinician-rated WHO-DAS-II. CONCLUSIONS: This research supports the potential clinical utility of rapid screening tools available in the newest psychiatric diagnostic manual. The internalizing symptom domain was the strongest predictor of functional outcome for outpatients with psychotic disorders. The results highlight the relevance of a broad range of symptoms, including those that fall outside the primary psychiatric concern, in recovery-oriented clinical work in psychosis.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".