Communicative behavior of individuals with a diagnosis of schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose to describe the communicative behavior of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia in psychosocial rehabilitation. Methods a descriptive and exploratory study with a convenience, cross-sectional sample. 50 individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, of both sexes, aged between 19 and 75 years, users of a mental health unit in the interior of the state of São Paulo, Brasil participated in the study. Survey was conducted in the medical records for personal data and subtype of schizophrenia. To evaluate the communicative behavior, the instrument Montreal Battery of Evaluation of Communication (Drums MAC) was used, which is consisted of 14 tasks that assess discursive aspects: pragmatic-inferential, lexical-semantic and prosodic language. Results most participants were males, with low education, Catholics, with schizophrenia paranoid type. The assessment through Battery MAC showed changes in all tasks evaluated and most participants said they were aware of the difficulty related to communication. The biggest changes occurred in the tasks of lexical evocation with semantic criteria, indirect speech acts, conversational discourse and narrative discourse, and the smallest changes occurred in the prosodic components related to understanding, highlighting that the level of production related to linguistic and emotional aspects of prosody also showed considerable change. Conclusion all tasks evaluated presented changes. The most affected aspects were the discourse and pragmatics, which should not only be related to linguistic aspects, but also the characteristics of changes in thought and cognition, the affective blunting and social issues of this 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".