Reasons for discontinuation and continuation of antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia from patient and clinician perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify reasons for discontinuation and continuation of antipsychotic medications in the treatment of schizophrenia from the patients' and their clinicians' perspectives. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two measures were previously developed to assess the Reasons for Antipsychotic Discontinuation/Continuation (RAD), one from the patient's perspective and another from the clinician's perspective. These measures were administered to acutely ill schizophrenia patients enrolled in a 12-week study of antipsychotic medications (N = 596) and to their clinicians. The RAD was assessed at baseline and at endpoint. Reasons were rated on a 5-point scale from 'primary reason' to 'not a reason.' The single most important reason was also identified. The 'single most important reason' and the 'primary reasons' for discontinuing the drug used prior to enrollment, and for discontinuing or continuing the study drug were identified. Levels of concordance between patients' and clinicians' reasons were assessed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The data source for this study is a clinical trial registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00337662). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reasons for Antipsychotic Discontinuation/Continuation (RAD). RESULTS: Patients and clinicians identified several reasons for medication discontinuation and continuation (2.3 to 6.3 reasons, on average). The top 'single most important' reason for discontinuing the drug used prior to enrollment and for discontinuing the study drug was 'positive symptoms not sufficiently improved or made worse,' followed by 'medication-related adverse events.' The most frequent 'single most important' reason for medication continuation was 'improved positive symptoms,' followed by 'patient's perception of improvement,' and 'functional improvement.' A high level of concordance was observed between patients' and clinicians' ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Medication efficacy appears to be the core driver of medication discontinuation and continuation, especially with regard to positive symptoms. There was a high level of concordance between patients' and clinicians' perspectives. Limitations include the study requirement that patients be at least moderately ill and experiencing acute psychotic exacerbation, a potential selection bias in the readiness to respond to measures, and small sample sizes for some analyses. Further research is needed to replicate findings in patients who are not acutely ill.
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 | 0.010 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".