Patient Functioning, Life Engagement, and Treatment Goals in Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unmet needs in the treatment of schizophrenia include nonadherence to treatment, symptom relapse, incomplete functional recovery, and poor quality of life. Incorporating the patient's perspective into the treatment plan and measuring treatment outcomes that are meaningful to patients is an important part of addressing these issues. Goal setting is associated with greater improvements in motivation and role functioning, but clinicians should keep in mind that their goals for treatment may not align with those of their patients. Patients tend to think about their lives more holistically than clinicians, with equal weight given to social and clinical needs, and improved functioning and engagement with life are likely to emerge as priorities, beyond the need for symptom control. In a recent roundtable meeting, a panel of 5 experts discussed life engagement and its relationship to symptoms and functioning in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and schizophrenia. This Academic Highlights, part 2 in a series, summarizes the experts' discussion of how life engagement can inform goal-setting and treatment selection in patients with schizophrenia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".