“Extended” Antipsychotic Dosing in the Maintenance Treatment of Schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the treatment of schizophrenia, all currently available oral antipsychotics are administered at least once daily, with strict adherence strongly encouraged to minimize risk of relapse. Based on a better understanding of the brain kinetics of antipsychotics, we have proposed a variation of this approach, "extended" dosing, which allows for intermittent but regular dosing. METHOD: We carried out a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating 35 individuals with DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia who had been stabilized on antipsychotic therapy. Over a 6-month interval, 18 subjects received their medication as usual (daily), while 17 received their antipsychotic therapy every second day (extended). Outcome measures included clinical scales to assess symptoms (Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale [the primary outcome measure], Calgary Depression Scale), illness severity (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale), and relapse (ie, rehospitalization) rates. Side effects were also assessed, including movement disorders (Barnes Akathisia Scale, Simpson-Angus Scale, Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale) and weight. The study was conducted from February 2003 to July 2007. RESULTS: Individuals in the extended dosing group were not at greater risk of symptom exacerbation, relapse, or rehospitalization; indeed, more rehospitalizations occurred in those receiving regular dosing. At the same time, though, there was no indication that side effects were significantly reduced in the extended dosing group. CONCLUSIONS: These results challenge the long-standing dogma that oral antipsychotics must be administered daily in stabilized patients with schizophrenia. Further studies with larger samples are needed to replicate these findings, as well as to elucidate whether postulated clinical advantages can be established and determined to outweigh potential risks. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00431574.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".