Expert Canadian consensus suggestions on the rational, clinical use of ziprasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many atypical antipsychotic medications are becoming available for clinical use. Ziprasidone is a recent addition to this group and is expected to become available for clinical use in Canada in 2005. Ziprasidone has some significant differences compared with other atypicals currently available in Canada. Clinicians need to understand the benefits and risks associated with each of the antipsychotic medications available for the treatment of schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders to ensure their most appropriate utilization. At the suggestion of Professor Stan Kutcher (chair) and as part of an ongoing commitment to provide independent education pertaining to the utility of new psychotropic compounds to health professionals, a panel of Canadian experts in the treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders was convened to provide consensus suggestions for the appropriate clinical use of ziprasidone. The consultations regarding the development of these recommendations were organized by Brainworks International (BWI) with arms-length funding from Pfizer Canada. This paper describes the experts' consensus views on the efficacy and safety of ziprasidone, their suggestions on which patients may be suitable for ziprasidone treatment, and how to initiate treatment (including how to switch from other antipsychotic medications), manage side effects, and monitor patients in long-term therapy. These suggestions are those of the authors only and are not endorsed by or necessarily reflect the opinions of BWI or Pfizer Canada.
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 | 0.050 | 0.115 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".