Self-reported health and smoking status, and body mass index: a case-control comparison based on GEN SCRIP (GENetics of SChizophRenia In Pakistan) data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Individuals with schizophrenia are at a high risk of physical health comorbidities and premature mortality. Cardiovascular and metabolic causes are an important contributor. There are gaps in monitoring, documenting and managing these physical health comorbidities. Because of their condition, patients themselves may not be aware of these comorbidities and may not be able to follow a lifestyle that prevents and manages the complications. In many low-income and middle-income countries including Pakistan, the bulk of the burden of care for those struggling with schizophrenia falls on the families. Objectives To determine the rate of self-reported physical health disorders and risk factors, like body mass index (BMI) and smoking, associated with cardiovascular and metabolic disorders in cases of schizophrenia compared with a group of mentally healthy controls. Design A case-controlled, cross-sectional multicentre study of patients with schizophrenia in Pakistan. Settings Multiple data collection sites across the country for patients, that is, public and private psychiatric OPDs (out patient departments), specialised psychiatric care facilities, and psychiatric wards of teaching and district level hospitals. Healthy controls were enrolled from the community. Participants We report a total of 6838 participants’ data with (N 3411 (49.9%)) cases of schizophrenia compared with a group of healthy controls (N 3427 (50.1%)). Results BMI (OR 0.98 (CI 0.97 to 0.99), p=0.0025), and the rate of smoking is higher in patients with schizophrenia than in controls. Problems with vision (OR 0.13 (0.08 to 0.2), joint pain (OR 0.18 (0.07 to 0.44)) and high cholesterol (OR 0.13 (0.05 to 0.35)) have higher reported prevalence in controls. The cases describe more physical health disorders in the category ‘other’ (OR 4.65 (3.01 to 7.18)). This captures residual disorders not listed in the questionnaire. Conclusions Participants with schizophrenia in comparison with controls report more disorders. The access in the ‘other’ category may be a reflection of undiagnosed disorders.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".