Risperidone in acute and continuation treatment of mania
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a prospective study, we examined the efficacy of risperidone added-on to mood stabilizers in the acute and continuation treatment of mania over a 12-week period. Patients (n=108) with a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar disorder, manic or mixed episode requiring treatment with an antipsychotic were recruited. All subjects were on one or two mood stabilizers at the time of initiation of risperidone (range 0.5-4 mg). No other antipsychotic medication or ongoing benzodiazepine therapy was allowed. There was a significant decrease in mean Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores from baseline (27.5+/-7.5) to week 1 (-10.8, P<0.0001), week 3 (-17.7, P<0.0001) and to week 12(-22.6, P<0.0001). When response was defined as > or = 50% reduction in YMRS scores from baseline, 32%, 68% and 90% of patients met criteria at week 1, week 3 and week 12, respectively. Significant decreases in mean 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores from baseline (12.2+/-7.7) to week 3 (-5.7, P<0.0001) and week 12 (-5.7, P<0.0001) were also observed. No significant changes in extrapyramidal symptoms were noted between baseline and endpoint. The mean daily dose of risperidone was 2 mg with a median of 1.8 mg. These findings support the results of the two previous double-blind, randomized trials and indicate that the addition of risperidone to mood stabilizers is a safe and effective treatment for acute and continuation treatment of mania. Risperidone add-on does not induce depressive symptoms and, furthermore, risperidone may have efficacy in treating comorbid depressive symptoms in bipolar patients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it