[Depressive symptoms in schizophrenia]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with schizophrenia suffer frequently from comorbid depressive symptoms. However, there is a paucity of studies regarding prevalence, clinical diagnostic and treatment in the field. For this review, we performed a focused literature analysis to identify recommendation for the treatment and diagnosis of schizophrenia with comorbid depression. Furthermore, we searched different schizophrenia guidelines for specific treatment recommendations. Due to the complex and heterogeneous picture of depressive symptoms in schizophrenia, the application of standardized assessment tools is recommended. For these purposes, the CDSS (Calgary depression rating scale for Schizophrenia) is such an established tool. In summary, there is only limited evidence for specific treatment recommendations. A change in antipsychotic treatment should usually be preferred before an antidepressant is introduced. In the group of antidepressants, SSRI seem to have some advantages, but most clinical and scientific experience is available for tricyclic antidepressants. Due to the limited original contributions and studies with sufficient methodology, further interventional trials are needed to give specific recommendations with high evidence grades.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".