MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391538039 · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-53468-4

Quantifying the effects of practicing a semantic task according to subclinical schizotypy

2024· article· en· W4391538039 on OpenAlexaff
Mingyi Diao, Ilya Demchenko, Gifty Asare, Yelin Chen, J. Bruno Debruille

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizotypyCategorizationPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychosocialTask (project management)Subclinical infectionN400Clinical psychologySchizotypal personality disorderTest (biology)Cognitive psychologyMedicinePsychosisCognitionPsychiatryEvent-related potentialComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The learning ability of individuals within the schizophrenia spectrum is crucial for their psychosocial rehabilitation. When selecting a treatment, it is thus essential to consider the impact of medications on practice effects, an important type of learning ability. To achieve this end goal, a pre-treatment test has to be developed and tested in healthy participants first. This is the aim of the current work, which takes advantage of the schizotypal traits present in these participants to preliminary assess the test's validity for use among patients. In this study, 47 healthy participants completed the Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire (SPQ) and performed a semantic categorization task twice, with a 1.5-hour gap between sessions. Practice was found to reduce reaction times (RTs) in both low- and high-SPQ scorers. Additionally, practice decreased the amplitudes of the N400 event-related brain potentials elicited by semantically matching words in low SPQ scorers only, which shows the sensitivity of the task to schizotypy. Across the two sessions, both RTs and N400 amplitudes had good test-retest reliability. This task could thus be a valuable tool. Ongoing studies are currently evaluating the impact of fully deceptive placebos and of real antipsychotic medications on these practice effects. This round of research should subsequently assist psychiatrists in making informed decisions about selecting the most suitable medication for the psychosocial rehabilitation of a patient.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicSchizophrenia research and treatment→French-language works237,207→