ArticleThe Psychiatric quarterly2026
Diagnostic Utility of Formal Thought Disorder Between Affective and Non-Affective Psychosis: A Machine Learning Approach.
Article in The Psychiatric quarterly, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The multidimensional nature of formal thought disorder (FTD) offers potential diagnostic utility in distinguishing between schizophrenia and affective disorders. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the Thought and Language Disorder Scale (TALD) factors in differentiating schizophrenia, mania, depression, and healthy controls, as well as in distinguishing affective and non-affective psychosis. We included 234 participants: Schizophrenia (n = 70), mania (n = 38), depression (n = 71), and healthy controls (n = 55). All participants were assessed using TALD, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMANI). In group comparisons, the mania group showed the highest scores in the Objective Positive and Subjective Positive factors, while the schizophrenia group exhibited global disturbances across all TALD factors. The depression group had lower scores for both Objective Negative and Subjective Negative factors compared to the schizophrenia group. Support Vector Machine models revealed that TALD factors achieved 72% accuracy in classifying psychiatric disorders versus healthy controls, with 95%, 94%, and 77% accuracy in distinguishing schizophrenia from controls, mania, and depression, respectively. Affective and non-affective psychosis were distinguished with 90% accuracy, with affective psychosis showing higher positive FTD scores and non-affective psychosis showing higher negative FTD scores. TALD factors were significantly correlated with core symptom domains of each disorder in PANSS, YMANI, and HAMD scores. The TALD scale demonstrated robust diagnostic utility in differentiating schizophrenia, mania, depression, and healthy controls and in distinguishing between affective and non-affective psychosis. Integrating FTD into diagnostic frameworks, alongside machine learning approaches, may enhance the precision of psychiatric diagnoses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41760989What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.