Fear of psychotic relapse: exploring dynamic relationships with common early warning signs of relapse using electronic once-a-day self-reports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Fear of relapse into psychosis is an independent risk factor for future relapse events, indicating its importance as a novel intervention target.Methods Twenty-five participants responded to daily ecological momentary assessment prompts assessing common early warning signs of relapse and self-reported positive experiences like feeling supported by others. We conducted multilevel vector auto-regression using common symptoms assessed in early warning signs monitoring relapse prevention while controlling for positive self-reported experiences like feeling supported by others to estimate three networks (to explore concurrent, temporal and overall relationships).Results Reporting fear of relapse was positively associated (within the same cross-sectional time window) with hearing voices, alongside anxiety, negative affect and sleep change. Fear of relapse appeared to predict anxiety, negative affect and greater fear of relapse on the next consecutive day. However, none of the typical early warning signs predicted fear of relapse within the temporal window, and the observed relationships were small.Discussion Early warning signs appeared to be poor predictors of experiencing fear of relapse in this study. Fear of relapse predicts later anxiety and negative affect and may be a valuable intervention target within the daily life of people diagnosed 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".