Toxoplasma gondii infection and chronic schizophrenia: is there any association?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background: Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) infection has been identified as a risk factor for schizophrenia. Objectives: Herein, we sought to evaluate the association between T. gondii infection and clinical symptoms and quality of life in patients with schizophrenia. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 48 patients with chronic schizophrenia and 40 controls. Peripheral blood was drawn, and IgM and IgG anti-T. gondii antibodies were evaluated by Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Depressive, positive and negative symptoms were assessed, respectively, by the Calgary Depression Scale (CDS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Cognitive performance was assessed in patients by the Brazilian version of the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale (SCoRS-BR). Quality of life was assessed by the Brazilian version of the Quality of Life in Schizophrenia scale (QLS-BR). Results: The prevalence and titers of T. gondii IgM and IgG antibodies did not differ between patients and controls. The positive serology for T. gondii IgG antibodies was not associated with illness symptoms, cognitive performance, depressive symptoms or quality of life. Discussion: Our findings suggest that toxoplasmosis infection is not associated with severity of symptoms, quality of life, cognitive or depressive symptoms in schizophrenia patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".