Prof K C Dube Poster Award
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Quality of life (QOL) is considered an important outcome in the treatment of schizophrenia, but the correlates of QOL are poorly understood in this population. Aim: To evaluate the correlates of quality of life in patients with schizophrenia, currently in clinical remission. Methodology: 160 patients of schizophrenia in clinical remission were assessed on Self-report Quality of Life Measure, Demoralization Scale, Positive and Negative scale for schizophrenia, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, Internalized Stigma of Mental Illness Scale, Everyday discrimination scale, Rosenberg Self esteem Scale, Brief COPE and Brief Dyadic Scale of Expressed Emotions. Appropriate statistical analyses were applied. Results: The mean age of the study sample was 34.99 (SD: 9.13) years. The number of males outnumbered females. Total score on quality of life scale had statistically significant correlation with depression, discrimination, all domains of demoralization, loneliness, stigma, expressed emotions self esteem, maladaptive coping, total coping score and hopelessness. Conclusion: There is a need to routinely evaluate the patients of schizophrenia for quality of life and address various psychological distress to improve quality of life.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".