Factors associated with personal recovery in an outpatient sample of people with Schizophrenia in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract PurposeThis study aimed to assess the level of personal recovery and its associated factors in a Brazilian sample of people with schizophrenia. Methods This cross-sectional study comprised a non-probabilistic sample of 104 people with schizophrenia receiving outpatient care in a university psychiatric centre. Personal Recovery was measured using the short-version of the Recovery Assessment Scale (RAS), comprising 24 items. We first examined the domains of personal recovery in the study sample and their associations of with the following clinical measures were also used: the Self-Assessment of Occupational Functioning Scale (SAOF); the general psychopathology, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS); the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia; the Independent Living Skills Survey (ILSS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI). The mean scores of RAS domains were compared using ANOVA for repeated measures and clinical measures associated with RAS total score were identified using linear multiple regression. Significance level was p<0.05. Results RAS domains with the highest levels of recovery were “Goal/success orientation” and “Reliance on others”, while the domain “Not dominated by symptoms” presented the lowest score. Higher levels of personal recovery in general were associated only with a lower level of depressive symptoms (as measured by Calgary scale) and a higher score for occupational functioning (as measured by SAOF). ConclusionThis study replicated findings from the international literature about the domains of personal recovery and its associations with important clinical constructs. It also identified specific cultural aspects such as the importance of affective and social relationships (friends, family) for life and as support for processes recovery.
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 | 0.001 | 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".