Comparison of neuropsychological effects of adjunctive risperidone or quetiapine in euthymic patients with bipolar I disorder
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
Although associations between antipsychotic use and neuropsychological impairment in bipolar I disorder have been observed, there is a lack of studies comparing the effects of specific agents used in this population. We compared performance between patients receiving maintenance treatment with mood stabilizer monotherapy (n=15), adjunctive risperidone (n=15) or quetiapine (n=17), and a group of demographically matched healthy controls (n=28) on tests of executive function (working memory, set shifting, and inhibition) and verbal learning. Despite having a similar clinical profile, patients being treated with risperidone showed significantly impaired working memory, set-shifting, and verbal learning (P<0.05) compared with those either on mood stabilizer monotherapy or adjunctive quetiapine. Although randomized controlled trials are required to confirm the cognitive side effects of medications prescribed for maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder, preliminary results indicate that addition of risperidone to a mood stabilizer has a negative impact on executive function and verbal learning, an effect not shared with quetiapine.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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