Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34434137›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021

A Proposed Probabilistic Method for Distinguishing Between Delusions and Other Environmental Judgements, With Applications to Psychotherapy.

Boopala Arul, Daniel Lee, Sarah Marzen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Boopala ArulDivision of Biological Sciences, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.
Daniel LeeW. M. Keck Science Department, Pitzer, Scripps, and Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, CA, United States.
Sarah MarzenW. M. Keck Science Department, Pitzer, Scripps, and Claremont McKenna College, Claremont, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How can individuals with schizophrenia best be equipped to distinguish delusions from accurate judgements about their environment? This study presents an approach based on the principles of Bayesian probability and presents the results of a series of tests in which a simulated observer classifies randomly generated data characteristic of a simulated environment. The complexity of the data ranges from scalars to vectors of variable lengths, and the simulated observer makes its decisions based on either perfect or imperfect models of its environment. We find that when a low-dimensional observation is considered characteristic of both real observations and delusions, the prior probabilities of any observation being real or fake are of greater importance to the final decision than the attributes of the observation. However, when an observation is high-dimensional (complex), classification accuracy tends to improve toward 100% with increasing complexity of observations, as long as the patient's model of the world isn't drastically inaccurate. On the contrary, when the observer's model is sufficiently inaccurate, the accuracy rate decreases with increasing observational complexity. Overall, the results suggest applicability of the Bayesian model to the use of interventional therapy for those who suffer from psychosis.

Indexed as

Bayesian probabilitycognitive behavioral therapydelusionshallucinationsreality testingschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID34434137
PMCPMC8380927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.