Quetiapine treatment in early psychosis: 1 year outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To determine clinical response, dosing and adverse events associated with quetiapine treatment in early psychosis. Method 40 Patients (33 men; 7 women; mean age 23.75) with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and less than 6 months previous exposure to antipsychotic treatment, entered an open label, 2 years, flexible dose trial and were assessed with PANSS, CGI, GAF, SOFAS, ESRS, BMI and ocular exams at baseline and 6 month intervals thereafter. Results Among 30 patients who enrolled >1 years ago, 19 (63%) completed 1‐year assessment. Dropouts were due to insufficient clinical response (13%), nonadherence (13%) and personal choice (10%). At 1 year, significant improvement was observed on the PANSS, CGI, GAF and SOFAS. Mean dose was 559 (±207) mg/day. No drug induced EPS was noted and EPS present at baseline was reduced. Mean change in BMI was 17% (±22). No ocular changes were observed. Conclusions Quetiapine was well tolerated. Clinical response was similar to that achieved with other second generation antipsychotic agents in the same early psychosis programme.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".