Comparison of cognition and alexithymia in patients of schizophrenia with and without comorbid alcohol use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: Cognitive impairment and alexithymia are commonly associated with schizophrenia and alcohol use disorder independently. Both can lead to poor prognosis and recovery. In patients with dual diagnosis, this association can be more prevalent and severe. Materials and Methods: A total of 75 participants were grouped into two (35 each): Group A, a Schizophrenia group and Group B with comorbid alcohol use. Sociodemographic factors, clinical profile, cognitive functions, and alexithymia were compared between the two groups using semi-structured pro forma, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) Scale, Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) (subcategorized into three subscales (1) “Difficulty describing feelings” (DDF), (2) “Difficulty identifying feeling” (DIF), and (3) “Externally-Oriented Thinking” and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Statistical analysis was performed using the Chi-square tests and t -tests as applicable. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean age of the participants was 33.61 (standard deviation [SD]-8.11), mean duration of schizophrenia was 70.8 months (SD-47.5) and mean duration of alcohol consumption was 9.10 years (SD-7.7). MoCA score was significantly lower (mean-21.80, SD-2.98) and TAS total score was significantly higher in Group B (Mean-67.31, SD-8.10). DDF (Mean-19.28, SD-4.02) and DIF scores (Mean-22.86, SD-4.66) were significantly higher in alcohol group compared to nonalcohol group. Furthermore, MoCA score was significantly impaired and TAS total, DDF and DIF scores were significantly higher in participants with AUDIT score >8 ( P < 0.05). Lower score on MoCA correlated with the higher score of alexithymia. Conclusion: Cognitive dysfunction and alexithymia were significantly more in patients of schizophrenia with comorbid alcohol use and positively correlated with the severity of alcohol use disorder.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".