The relationship between subjective well-being and dopamine D2 receptors in patients treated with a dopamine partial agonist and full antagonist antipsychotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antipsychotic drugs produce unpleasant subjective experiences, which have been associated with high levels of dopamine D2 receptor occupancy. Aripiprazole is a partial agonist antipsychotic, which is hypothesized to produce a different subjective experience profile compared to standard D2 antagonist antipsychotics. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of D2 occupancy produced by a partial agonist antipsychotic (aripiprazole) to that of antagonist antipsychotics (risperidone or olanzapine) on the subjective well-being of patients. Subjective well-being was measured using the Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptics Scale (SWN) and was related to dopamine D2 receptor occupancy using [11C]raclopride PET. Patients that were switched to aripiprazole showed improvement in their subjective well-being from 79.80 (S.D.=16.08) to 89.90 (S.D.=15.33), an effect that was sustained for 6 months. This sustained improvement was observed despite very high levels of DA D2 occupancy (82-99%), in contrast to the effects of antagonist antipsychotics on subjective well-being.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".