Cognitive deficits in individuals with comorbid personality disorder and schizophrenia: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: It is estimated that approximately 40 % of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia also meet the diagnostic criteria for a personality disorder. This comorbidity is associated with an unfavorable prognosis for the illness. Given that cognition is currently the best predictor of recovery, this study aims to characterize the cognitive profiles of individuals with comorbid personality disorders and schizophrenia by reviewing literature from the past 24 years. We sought to determine whether the cognitive deficits differed from that of individuals with only a schizophrenia diagnosis, and to further characterize these differences. Method: Articles were gathered from PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, PsychInfo, PsychNet, MedLine, and EMBASE. They were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: (a) use of neuropsychological or social cognition measures, (b) explicit mental disorder diagnosis established using validated diagnostic tools, (c) participants with a comorbid personality disorder and schizophrenia diagnosis, and (d) results of neuropsychological measures specific to participants with this type of comorbidity. Results: A total of 10 articles were included. Of these, six clinically established a personality disorder diagnosis, while five measured traits associated with various personality disorders. Due to the heterogeneity of methodologies across the studies, no statistical conclusions could be drawn. Discussion/conclusion: Our review did highlight a greater presence of studies on antisocial personality, with few on other personality disorders or traits. Given the high comorbidity of personality disorders in schizophrenia, and the important impact of cognition on functioning, including social cognition, more studies are warranted. Recommendations for both clinicians and researchers are proposed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".