Childhood trauma in schizophrenia spectrum disorders and intensity of psychotic symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The relationship between history of childhood trauma (CT) and current schizophrenic symptoms is complex and controversial. Most of the studies report more positive psychotic symptoms (PPS) in psychotic patients who had suffered CT. Findings for negative psychotic symptoms (NPS) are mixed: most authors do not find differences or even find less. Objectives The purpose of this study is to evaluate and describe the types of CT suffered by patients diagnosed with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), and to analyse the relationship between history of CT and the present-time intensity of PPS and NPS. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study of 45 adult patients with a SSD. Instruments: Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, short form (CTQ-SF) for measuring CT and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) to assess the PPS and NPS of psychosis. Results 77.8% of the patients reported having suffered any kind of CT. By types of trauma: 48.9% reported emotional abuse, 28.9% physical abuse, 40.0% sexual abuse, 55.6% emotional neglect and 46.7% physical neglect. A lineal correlation between CTQ-SF and PANSS+/- scores was performed. Neither total PANSS+ nor any particular PANSS+ items correlate with CTQ scores. A significant inverse lineal association of moderate intensity exists between total PANSS− score and CT intensity (ρ = −0.300, p = 0.045) Conclusions In line with previous research, our study has found inverse correlation between NPS and CT. In contrast, no association was found between PPS and CT. Our sample was mostly composed by chronic patients, which might explain the differences with the previous literature. Disclosure No significant relationships.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".