Adli psikiyatri servisinde takip edilen şizofreni tanılı hastaların saldırganlık, depresyon ve hastalık şiddeti ile bazı kan parametreleri arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study is to examine the relationship between depressive symptoms, aggression levels and some laboratory parameters of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who are followed and treated in the forensic psychiatry service.Material and Methods: Patients diagnosed with schizophrenia according to DSM-5 criteria were included in the study. All participants completed a demographic and clinical assessment form. Additionally, the Buss Perry Aggression Scale (BPAS), Calgary Scale for Depression in Schizophrenia (CDS), and Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) were administered to the schizophrenia patient group.Results: 123 people were included in our study (62 people as schizophrenia patient group, 61 people as healthy control group). Of all the participants, 15 people (12.19%) were female; 108 people (87.80%) were male. The mean age of the participants was 38.91±9.67. 46 (37.39%) of the participants were married, while 69 (56.09%) were single. Of the patient group involved in crime, 29 people (46.77%) committed intentional homicide, 9 people (14.51%) committed intentional injury, 4 people (6.45%) committed sexual abuse, 3 people (4.83%) committed threat/injury, 3 people (4.83%) committed theft, 1 person (1.61%) committed drug trafficking, 1 person (1.61%) committed slander, 2 people (3.22%) committed membership in a terrorist organization, and 10 people (16.12%) committed simple injury. In laboratory parameters; Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), basophil/lymphocyte ratio (BLR), platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte/lymphocyte ratio (MLR) were found to be higher in the patient group. In addition, uric acid, cholesterol, and triglyceride values were also higher in the patient group than in the controls.Conclusion: In our study, in which we compared the criminal schizophrenia patients with controls in terms of some laboratory parameters and aggression levels, we obtained significant results in many parameters. In order for the obtained results to gain significance, further studies are needed in larger sample groups.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".