New generation antipsychotic drugs and compliance behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antipsychotic therapy has been eclipsed by high rates of noncompliance; the problem was attributed to a lack of efficacy and the burden of side effects of neuroleptics. This review sought to examine whether the arrival of second generation (atypical) antipsychotic drugs with low side-effect liability and improved efficacy has helped to positively reinforce compliance behaviour among people treated for schizophrenia. RECENT FINDINGS: The number of studies that systematically examined compliance behaviour and its determinants during antipsychotic drug therapy is disappointingly low. A review of relevant clinical trials, drug dispensation databases and observational studies yielded equivocal results. The data have failed to substantiate the notion that novel antipsychotic drug use leads to improved medication compliance and favourable clinical outcomes. SUMMARY: A decade of clinical experience and research indicates that compliance behaviour has only marginally improved since the introduction of second generation antipsychotic drugs. Noncompliance in schizophrenia is a complex maladaptive pattern of behaviour determined by personal beliefs, illness-related factors, social attributes and health system variables. The reinforcing value of antipsychotic drugs may be less relevant in enhancing treatment compliance and influencing the natural history of schizophrenia.
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 | 0.000 | 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".