Depressive Symptoms and PANSS Symptom Dimensions in Patients With Predominant Negative Symptom Schizophrenia: A Network Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Schizophrenia is a severe psychiatric disorder with a large symptomatic heterogeneity. Moreover, many patients with schizophrenia present with comorbid psychiatric symptoms or disorders. The relation between depressive symptoms and negative symptoms, such as blunted affect, alogia, anhedonia, asociality and avolition, is particularly intriguing. The negative symptoms can be primary or secondary of depression or overlapping with depressive symptoms. The aim of the present network analysis was to better understand the interactions between depressive symptoms and the different symptoms of schizophrenia and to investigate whether negative symptoms and depressive symptoms can be better delineated. Methods: A network analysis on the baseline item scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) from the cariprazine-risperidone study in patients with predominant negative symptoms (PNS) was performed. The connections between all these symptoms (PANSS and CDSS) were investiged: node strength and network centrality were estimated and the Mohr 5-factor model of the PANSS was applied to test the validity of its different symptoms clusters. Results: Across 460 patients with schizophrenia and PNS, the most central symptom (largest node strength) was depression (PANSS) followed by depression (CDSS), anxiety, lack of judgment and insight and tension. The PANSS negative symptom cluster together and was only poorly connected with CDSS depresson symptoms. The Mohr 5 factor model was clearly recognized in the overall clustering of symptoms. Conclusion: This network analysis suggests that depression and anxiety symptoms are the most central in this PNS patient population, despite the baseline low depression scores, and that negative symptoms are a clearly independent symptom cluster that can be delineated from depressive symptoms.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".