Treatment of depressive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present analysis assessed the efficacy of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) versus risperidone in patients with schizophrenia and depressive symptoms [Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score≥20 and a HAM-D item 1 score≥2]. This was a subanalysis of patients with schizophrenia from a randomized, open-label, parallel-group, flexible-dose study (NCT00640562) that also enrolled patients with schizoaffective disorder. The primary endpoint of this noninferiority study was change from baseline to week 12 in Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia score (per protocol population). Overall, 114 patients received quetiapine XR (n=60; 400-800 mg/day) or risperidone (n=54; 4-6 mg/day). Change in Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia score was greater for quetiapine XR than for risperidone [least squares means: -7.2 vs. -4.8; treatment difference 2.4 (95% confidence interval 0.3-4.6; P<0.05)]. Adverse events (≥3%) among patients receiving quetiapine XR were sedation, somnolence, and dry mouth, and among those receiving risperidone were anxiety, insomnia, asthenia, hyperprolactinemia, and somnolence. Abnormally high prolactin levels were reported for 57.6 and 8.1% of patients receiving risperidone and quetiapine XR, respectively. Quetiapine XR was superior to risperidone at reducing depressive symptoms in patients with 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".