Relationship between Depressive Symptoms and Subjective Wellbeing in Patients with Schizophrenia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Subjective wellbeing for those who have schizophrenia is a big challenges which leads to increased psychological distress, worsening depressive symptoms, low self-esteem, unhappiness, conflict, and suffering. Patients with depressive symptoms have a lower quality of life, which is reflected on the extensive burden of schizophrenia and the need for treatment. Purpose: To assess the relation between depressive symptoms and subjective wellbeing among patients with schizophrenia. Design: A descriptive correlational design was utilized. The study was conducted at Meet Khalaf Psychiatric Hospital in Shebin El-kom city, Menoufia Governorate, Egypt. Sample: A purposive sample of 148 patients who had schizophrenia was selected. Instruments: Three instruments were used 1) A structured interview questionnaire to assess socio-demographic characteristics and medical history of the patients 2) Calgary depression scale for schizophrenia 3) Subjective wellbeing under neuroleptic short version scale. Results: 92.6% of the studied patients with schizophrenia had low level of subjective wellbeing, 7.4% had moderate level of subjective wellbeing, 85% of the studied patients with schizophrenia suffered from major depressive episode and 96.8% of patients with schizophrenia who had depressive episode had low subjective wellbeing. Conclusion: There was a statistical significant negative correlation between subjective wellbeing and depressive symptoms. Recommendations: comprehensive intervention programs should be developed to improve depressive symptoms and enhance subjective wellbeing among patients 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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it