MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237351086 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbx024.124

SU127. Negative Symptoms in Youth at Clinical High Risk of Psychosis

2017· article· en· W4237351086 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel J. Devoe, Kristen S. Cadenhead, Tyrone D. Cannon, Barbara A. Cornblatt, Tom McGlashan, Diana O. Perkins, Larry J. Seidman, Ming T. Tsuang, Elaine F. Walker, Scott W. Woods, Carrie E. Bearden, Daniel H. Mathalon, Jean Addington

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProdromePsychosisAnalysis of varianceLongitudinal studyPsychologyRepeated measures designClinical psychologyPost-hoc analysisSeverity of illnessNegative symptomMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Longitudinal studies examining youth at clinical high risk (CHR) of psychosis have predominantly focused on positive symptoms. However, youth at CHR often demonstrate persistent and significant negative symptoms, which have been reported to be predictive of conversion to psychosis. The goal of this study was to examine negative symptoms over time in youth at CHR of psychosis and compare baseline negative symptoms in those who convert to psychosis with those who did not convert. Methods: Youth at CHR (N = 764) were recruited for the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS 2) at 8 sites across North America. Negative symptoms were rated on the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS) at baseline, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Difference in prevalence of negative symptoms was assessed using Z test and change in negative symptom severity over time was assessed using repeated measures analysis of variance ANOVA. Wilcoxon rank sum test and 2-sample t test were utilized to compare baseline negative symptoms in converters vs nonconverters. Results: The mean total negative symptom score at baseline was 11.90 (SD = 9.80). A majority of participants (84.57%) had at least one negative symptom rated ≥3 at baseline. Negative symptom severity significantly decreased over time compared to baseline measures. Eighty-six participants converted in total. In participants with at least one negative symptom of moderate severity or above (N ≥ 3), nonconverters had lower severity ratings on expression of emotion (M = 1.49, SD = 1.47 vs M = 1.94, SD = 1.64, P = .02) and ideational richness (M = 1.23, SD = 1.37 vs M = 1.60, SD = 1.35, P = .04) compared to converters at baseline. In participants who completed 24 months of assessment and had negative symptom severity of moderate severity or above (N ≥ 3), nonconverters had significantly better expression of emotion (M = 1.40, SD = 1.51) compared to converters (M = 1.79, SD = 1.63, P = .03). Conclusion: First, this study demonstrated that the majority of youth at CHR have moderate to severe negative symptoms at baseline. Second, both decreased expression of emotion and decreased ideational richness was significantly more severe in participants who converted and may be indicative of later conversion to psychosis. Thus, early and persistent higher negative symptom scores may represent subsequent risk of conversion to 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207