Active treatment of affective disturbances may improve functional outcomes in patients in the early state of psychosis: Results of the PRONIA study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The functional outcome of patients with psychotic disturbances is associated with several overlapping premorbid, societal, neuropsychological, and clinical factors. Extracting the factors associated with functional outcomes is important for designing effective mental health interventions. METHODS: In a naturalistic prospective European multicentre study, we analysed the effects of sociodemographic, preadmission, admission, and postadmission precursors on functional outcomes in 296 patients with recent-onset psychosis (ROP) and 262 patients at clinically high risk of psychosis (CHR-P). Functioning was assessed with the Global Assessment of Functioning-symptoms and deficits version-at baseline and at the 9- and 18-month follow-ups. RESULTS: In the overall sample, male sex, childhood adversities, poor sociability, scholastic problems, neurocognitive deficits, and greater severity of baseline and follow-up symptoms were associated with poor functional outcomes. In contrast, a favourable work/educational situation and preadmission treatment for nonpsychotic disorders were associated with better functional outcomes. Among ROP patients, neurocognitive deficits and the severity of baseline and follow-up affective and psychotic symptoms were strongly associated with functional outcomes. Among CHR-P patients, premorbid sociability, previous treatment for affective disorders, and follow-up affective symptoms played more significant roles. CONCLUSIONS: To improve functioning in patients in the early stages of psychosis, several factors should be considered, such as sex, childhood adversities, psychosocial development, baseline neurocognitive deficits, work/educational situation, clinical presentations, and follow-up symptoms. Personalized and integrated treatment and rehabilitation measures should be actively continued beyond the first admission period, with a particular focus on addressing both baseline and follow-up affective disturbances.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".