Clinical and Therapeutic Factors Affecting the Social Adaptation of Patients with Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: сurrently, the question remains open about the factors that affect the social functioning of patients with schizophrenia, including the role of negative symptoms and neurocognitive deficits. The aim: to study factors that affect the social functioning of patients with schizophrenia. Patients and methods: 64 in-patient with schizophrenia (mean age 35.9 ± 10.9 years) were examined at the stage of remission. The disease duration was 9.71 ± 6.0 years. The majority of patients suffered from paranoid and hallucinatory-paranoid attacs (43 and 23%, respectively). The study used follow-up, clinical and psychopathological methods as well as psychometric scales: PANSS, SANS, ВАСS, Calgary scales and UKU scales. An integrative indicator was introduced to assess the social adaptation of patients. Results: it is shown that as the duration of the disease increases, the indicator of social adaptation decreases. The presence of side effects of antipsychotic therapy is associated with restrictions on the social functioning of patients, but the use of second-generation antipsychotics contributes to an increase in the level of social functioning of patients. Patients with more pronounced apathetic-abulic disorders, flattened affect, anhedonia-asociality and social isolation are characterized by a lower level of social functioning. Adapted patients differ from maladapted patients by better indicators of auditory-speech memory, motor skills, information processing speed, ability to plan and problem solving behavior. Conclusion: the integrative indicator of social adaptation of patients with schizophrenia is associated with a number of cognitive and negative symptoms, features of antipsychotic therapy and the duration of the disease.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".