Neighborhood Characteristics and Social Functioning: Exploring Shared and Distinct Psychosocial Pathways Among Individuals at Clinical High-Risk for Psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Recent research suggests that environmental factors may contribute to psychosis through at least partially distinct pathways. This study examined how neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and social fragmentation relate to impaired social functioning in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) via social and contextual risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected from the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study Phase 3. Neighborhood characteristics were geocoded using participant addresses at baseline. Social and contextual risk factors were derived from the Structural Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth. Social functioning was measured using the Global Assessment of Functioning: Social Scale. STUDY RESULTS: Neighborhood social fragmentation was associated with greater peer rejection (β = 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-0.22, P = .034), which, in turn, was negatively associated with social functioning (β = -0.18; 95% CI, -0.23 to -0.12, P < .001). Both neighborhood social fragmentation (β = 0.18; 95% CI, 0.03-0.33, P = .022) and neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation (β = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.21-0.48, P < .001) were associated with greater community disorganization, which was negatively associated with social functioning (β = -0.08; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.01, P = .046). Neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation had a direct negative association with social functioning (β = -0.15; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.02, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified shared and distinct pathways relating neighborhood characteristics to impaired social functioning among CHR-P individuals. Understanding how environmental factors impact social functioning may help develop effective interventions for youth at high risk.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".