MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414207092 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2025.421

The Influence of Birth Weight on Cognitive Reserve and its impact on one-year Functioning in First-Episode Psychosis patients

2025· article· en· W4414207092 on OpenAlexaff
M.F. Forte, S. Amoretti, Ana M. Sánchez-Torres, Laura Pina‐Camacho, E. Vieta, Clemente García‐Rizo

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitivePsychosisMediationCognitionVerbal memoryCognitive reserveSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Cognitive skill

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Cognition is key to long-term outcomes in first-episode psychosis (FEP). Obstetric complications affect working and verbal memory in schizophrenia (Amoretti et al. Psychol Med, 2022;52:2874-2884). Among them, birth weight (BW), an indicator of prenatal development, has been studied in relation to cognition (Krishna et al. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry, 2019;34:1139-1169). Higher cognitive reserve (CR) is associated with better cognitive and functional outcomes (Amoretti et al. Psychol Med, 2022;52:526-537). It is hypothesized that low BW impacts fetal brain development, reducing CR and later functioning (Krishna et al. Int Psychogeriatr, 2021;1-14) Objectives To examine the relationship between BW and functioning one year after the onset of psychosis, mediated by CR and cognitive performance Methods 117 FEP patients and 224 healthy controls (HC) were recruited. BW was collected as a continuous variable in grams. The Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) assessed functioning. CR was quantified via premorbid IQ, educational attainment, and lifetime participation in leisure and social activities. A complete neurocognitive assessment was performed. Correlational analyses explored relationships between BW, CR, and cognition in FEP and HC. Serial mediation analysis (PROCESS Model 6) examined indirect effects of BW on functioning through CR and cognition Results No significant differences were found in BW between patients and HC (p=0.719). HC had higher CR than patients (p<0.001) (Figure 1). In patients, BW correlated with CR (r=0.20, p=0.027), though no correlation was found in HC (r=0.10, p=0.216) (Figure 2). The mediation model confirmed that BW was associated with CR (β=0.01, p=0.015), CR was linked to verbal memory (β=2.21, p=0.001) and verbal memory with functioning (β=0.07, p=0.004). The direct and total indirect effects of BW on functioning were non-significant. Among the indirect paths, only the one involving CR and verbal memory was significant (95%CI [0.0001, 0.0016]) (Figure 3). Image 1: Image 2: Image 3: Conclusions While BW did not have a direct impact on psychosocial functioning, it does influence CR, which in turn affects verbal memory. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean PsychiatrySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207