Role of Positive-Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia on Motivation and Cognitive Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigating positive-negative symptoms, motivation, and cognitive functioning in individuals with schizophrenia was the aim of the current study. In this cross-sectional study, 70 outpatients with schizophrenia who were 19 years of age or older participated. Every participant finished the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA), the Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS), and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS-4.0). The hypothesis that positive symptoms would boost motivation and have no effect on cognitive functioning in schizophrenia patients while negative symptoms would lower motivation and cognitive functioning was examined using linear regression. The results reflected that positive symptoms significantly increase the motivation and had no effect on cognitive functioning in schizophrenic patients. The results also have revealed that negative symptoms significantly decrease the motivation patients whereas it was a non-significantly predictor of cognitive functioning in schizophrenic patients. These findings might help in development and providing interventions to schizophrenic dealing with problems with motivation and cognitive functioning.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".