MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386197003 · doi:10.22259/2638-5201.0201002

Paucity of Derealization and Depersonalization Signs in Chronic Schizophrenia

2019· article· en· W4386197003 on OpenAlexaff
Zack Z. Cernovsky, Simon Chiu, Y Bureau

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMental Health and Psychiatry
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerealizationDepersonalizationSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryBurnoutEmotional exhaustion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Derealization (subjective experience of unreality of the surrounding world) and depersonalization (feeling detached from one's mental or bodily processes) have been been considered as pathological symptoms.We examined the presence and stability of depersonalization-derealization over time in chronic schizophrenia.Method: Patients with chronic schizophrenia (N=41, 28 men, 13 women, mean age 38.5 years, SD=12.4) were rated at baseline, week 2, week 5, and week 8 with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) and with other psychiatric scales, i.e., 4 times. The Item 19 of the 31 item version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) measures the depersonalization-derealization (DD): we evaluated the changes in DD scores over the 4 time points.Results: Most patients (68.3%) consistently reported absence of symptoms of DD over the 4 timepoints.Five patients (12.2%) described a "mild" symptom of DD at least once at the 4 time points, 7 patients (17.1%) reported DD at a "moderate" level at least once,and only one patient (2.4%) reported "severe" DD, however, only once over the 4 time points.The DD measures were not significantly correlated (p>.05, one tailed) with the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms(SANS) and its subscales, the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the HAM-D version that includes only the first 17 items (i.e., without Item 19), and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS).An exception was the PANSS subscale of positive symptoms (r=.40, p=.005, 1-tailed): those with DD signs experienced more intense positive symptoms of psychosis. Conclusions:Only minimal variation in the level of DD was observed over 8 weeks.DD symptoms were completely absent in about two-thirds of these patients.The DD scores were not significantly correlated to various measures of psychopathology (SANS, PANSS, BPRS) except for the PANSS subscale of positive symptoms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Psychiatry and Behavioral SciencesSame topicMental Health and PsychiatryFrench-language works237,207