Impact of Biological Sex on Emotional Perception Among Adults With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: Protocol for a Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is well established that individuals with schizophrenia experience deficits in emotional perception that can impact long-term social and occupational functioning. Understanding the factors that impact these impairments is important for targeting interventions to improve recovery. In the general population, compared with males, females tend to show greater perception of emotions. Whether this sex difference persists in schizophrenia is less clear. In contrast to males, females diagnosed with schizophrenia tend to have a higher age of disease onset and better premorbid functioning but do not necessarily have better outcomes. Effective treatments for social cognitive impairments are highly relevant to long-term functional rehabilitation. A greater understanding of the cognitive deficits in emotional perception within females and males living with schizophrenia may assist interventions to be better tailored to individuals. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aims to collate, synthesize, and critically appraise evidence considering the influence of biological sex (female and male) on the emotional perception of individuals with schizophrenia. METHODS: This is a systematic review protocol based on the PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols) guidelines. The electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO will be systematically searched. To be included in this review, studies must compare the emotional perceptions of male and female participants older than 18 years who have a primary diagnosis of a schizophrenia spectrum disorder. Qualitative studies, case reports, case series, unpublished manuscripts, and studies not reported in English will be excluded. Key search strategies will include combinations of the following terms: "men," "male," "man," "female," "women," "woman," "sex," "gender," "emotional perception," "emotional processing," "schizophrenia," "schizophren," "psychotic disorders," "psychosis," "psychoses," "psychotic," "schizoaffective," "schizotypal personality disorder," and "schizotyp." Identified studies will be uploaded to the web-based Covidence systematic review management software. The risk of bias for individual studies will be assessed using the relevant Joanna Briggs Institute checklist tools. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system will also be used to evaluate the strength of the evidence base. Findings will be synthesized to provide a systematic summary of the existing literature. If sufficiently comparable data to permit meta-analysis emerges, a random-effects meta-analysis will be performed. RESULTS: This systematic review was registered with the PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) in October 2023. The search and screening of study titles and abstracts are currently underway. Data are expected to be extracted and analyzed in July 2024. CONCLUSIONS: Results will contribute to an improved understanding of the social cognitive profiles of males and females with schizophrenia. This knowledge is expected to inform the adaptation of interventions to improve functional outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023463561; https://tinyurl.com/34sr3rnf. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/56977.
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 | 0.065 | 0.069 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.065 | 0.006 |
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".