MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7118162187 · doi:10.12809/eaap2544

Adaptation and validation of the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-Effect Scale in Bangladesh

2025· article· en· W7118162187 on OpenAlexaff
Taiyeb Ibna Zahangir, Helal Uddin Ahmed, Jhowhar Datta, Sadia Afrin, Ahsan Aziz Sarkar

Bibliographic record

VenueEast Asian Archives of Psychiatry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Adaptation (eye)Relevance (law)Project commissioningDiscriminant validityPredictive validityLinear discriminant analysisSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to adapt and validate the Glasgow Antipsychotic Side-Effect Scale (GASS) in Bangla. METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with a psychiatric disorder who were currently taking antipsychotics were recruited from a tertiary care psychiatric hospital using convenience sampling. Additionally, patients aged ≥18 years with a psychiatric disorder who had not received any antipsychotic medications in the past 6 months were recruited as controls. Participants were assessed using the newly adapted GASS Bangla. Internal consistency was assessed using McDonald's omega. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to determine the factor structure. Discriminant validity was examined. RESULTS: In total, 153 male and 67 female patients (mean age, 27.8 years) who were receiving antipsychotic medications were included. The most common diagnoses were schizophrenia spectrum disorders (49.1%) and bipolar disorders (46.8%). The median duration of illness was 36 months, and the median duration of antipsychotic medication was 4 months. Additionally, 29 male and 21 female controls (mean age, 30.2 years) were included. The mean GASS Bangla score of the patients was 13.3 ± 8.4. Among the 220 patients, 181 (82.3%) reported absent or mild adverse effects, 34 (15.5%) reported moderate adverse effects, and five (2.3%) reported severe adverse effects. In contrast, all controls reported either absent or mild adverse effects. Patients taking antipsychotic medication had higher median GASS Bangla scores than controls (12 vs 2, p < 0.001), supporting the scale's discriminant validity. Internal consistency of the GASS Bangla was moderate (McDonald's omega = 0.604). Factor loadings ranged from 0.040 to 0.573, with most items loading above the conventional threshold of 0.30. Principal component analysis revealed a seven-factor structure that explained 58.9% of the total variance. CONCLUSION: The GASS Bangla is a user-friendly instrument for use as a screening tool. Despite moderate internal consistency, its clinical relevance and strong discriminant validity support its application in clinical practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEast Asian Archives of PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207