The negative and positive symptoms in people suffering from schizophrenia during the pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pandemic had a significant impact on the physical and mental health of the world population. In this context, higher levels of negative and positive symptoms related to psychosis have been observed. The present study aimed to verify, through a systematic review and meta-analysis, the evolution of negative and positive symptoms of schizophrenia during the pandemic period. The present work adhered to the PRISMA guidelines, and the GRADE and New Castle Ottawa bias scales were applied. Longitudinal studies from 2020-2021 that assessed negative and/or positive symptoms in persons diagnosed with schizophrenia before and during the pandemic period were searched on PubMed, PsycInfo and PsycArticles. The main results showed significant differences between the pre and the pandemic period regarding negative symptoms [95% CI -0.47 (-0.70, -0.24); Z = 4.01 (p 0.0001)]. In conclusion, the work showed a worsening of negative symptoms during the pandemic in persons with schizophrenia. The results suggested the importance, in the post-pandemic period, of planning psychosocial interventions for these individuals.
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 | 0.011 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".