MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4407418274 · doi:10.1093/ijnp/pyae059.635

THE HIGH RATE OF THE ADHERENCE TO PHARMACOTHERAPY GUIDELINE IN RECOVERY AND REMISSION IN PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

2025· article· en· W4407418274 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryo Asada, Hikaru Hori, Leo Gotoh, Kiyohiro Yasumatsu, Hitoshi Iida, Hiroaki Kawasaki

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSchizophrenia research and treatment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGuidelinePharmacotherapySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Cross-sectional studyMedicinePsychiatryMedication adherencePsychologyInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Recovery is considered one of the goals for patients with schizophrenia. However, a systematic review reported that the rate of recovery was 13.5% [1], and this has remained low compared with the rate of remission [2]. Thus, achieving recovery is a more difficult goal than achieving remission in schizophrenia patients. In Japan, the guideline for pharmacological therapy for schizophrenia has been published by the Japanese Society of Neuropsychopharmacology [3]. This guideline highly recommended second-generation antipsychotics monotherapy without the combination of other psychotropic drugs for patients in the acute and maintenance terms of schizophrenia. Individual fitness score (IFS) is a tool to evaluate the treatment for schizophrenia according to the guideline [4]. IFS is calculated as follows: 100 points were given for complete adherence to the guideline, and points were subtracted from the total score for any administered treatment that was not recommended. Previous studies using IFS have reported that adherence to the guideline contributes to improving psychiatric symptoms for patients with schizophrenia [5], but it is unclear whether the adherence could contribute to achieving recovery or improving functional outcome for patients with schizophrenia. Aims & Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the different states of schizophrenia patients (recovery, remission, non-remission) with IFS, and to assess whether adherence to the guideline could contribute to achieving recovery. Method This study was a cross-sectional study that included 64 Japanese schizophrenia patients. Inclusion criteria were individuals aged 20 to 65 who have not changed antipsychotics for at least 3 months and are not taking anticholinergics. Recovery was defined based on Liberman’ s criteria [6], and remission was defined based on Andreasen’ s criteria [7]. Non-remission was defined as not meeting the recovery, remission, and treatment-resistant criteria. We used the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) [8] and Calgary Depression Scale (CDSS) [9] for assessment of psychiatric symptoms. This study was approved by the Fukuoka University Medical Ethics Committee (U-21-11-018), and verbal and written consent was obtained from all participants. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS (ver. 27) with χ-square test, one-way analysis of variance, Kruskal– Wallis test, and receiver operating characteristic, with P<0.05. Results In the demographics and clinical characteristics of each group, no significant difference was found except for employment, number of admissions, BPRS score, and CDSS score. First, the IFS was significantly different among the three groups. The IFS in the recovery and remission groups were significantly higher than that in the non-remission group. However, there was no significantly difference in IFS between the recovery group and remission group. Second, the IFS of the remission group was significantly higher compared to that of the non-remission group (area under the curve = 0.82; cut-off point = 70). Discussion & Conclusion The results from the present study show that pharmacotherapy following the guideline of the Japanese Society of Neuropsychopharmacology may contribute to achieving remission for patients with schizophrenia but may not be sufficient for recovery. Furthermore, we propose that an IFS of 70 may be an indicator for pharmacotherapy aimed at remission for patients with schizophrenia. References 1.Jaaskelainen, E., et al., A systematic review and meta-analysis of recovery in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull, 2013. 39(6): p. 1296-306.2. 2.Lally, J., et al., Remission and recovery from first-episode psychosis in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis of long-term outcome studies. Br J Psychiatry, 2017. 211(6): p. 350-358.3. 3.Japanese Society of, N., Japanese Society of Neuropsychopharmacology: "Guideline for Pharmacological Therapy of Schizophrenia".Neuropsychopharmacol Rep, 2021. 41(3): p. 266-324.4. 4.Inada, K., et al., Development of individual fitness score for conformity of prescriptions to the "Guidelines For Pharmacological Therapy of Schizophrenia". Neuropsychopharmacol Rep, 2022. 42(4): p. 502-509.5. 5.Kodaka, F., et al., Relationships Between Adherence to Guideline Recommendations for Pharmacological Therapy Among Clinicians and Psychotic Symptoms in Patients With Schizophrenia. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol, 2023. 26(8): p. 557-565.6. 6.Liberman, R.P., et al., Operational criteria and factors related to recovery from schizophrenia. International Review of Psychiatry, 2002. 14(4): p. 256-272.7. 7.Andreasen, N.C., et al., Remission in schizophrenia: proposed criteria and rationale for consensus. Am J Psychiatry, 2005. 162(3): p. 441-9.8. 8.Overall, J.E. and D.R. Gorham, The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Psychological Reports, 1962. 10(3): p. 799-812.9. 9.Addington, D., J. Addington, and E. Maticka-tyndale, Assessing Depression in Schizophrenia: The Calgary Depression Scale. British Journal of Psychiatry, 1993. 163(S22): p. 39-44.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,012

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,375
Écart entre enseignants0,359 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2025
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe International Journal of NeuropsychopharmacologyMême sujetSchizophrenia research and treatmentTravaux en français237 207