Comparison of quetiapine and risperidone in Chinese Han patients with schizophrenia: results of a single-blind, randomized study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of 750 mg/day quetiapine fumarate (Seroquel) in the treatment of Chinese Han patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: In this 6-week, multicenter, randomized, rater single-blind study, a total of 119 patients with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to quetiapine (n = 60, 750 mg/day) or risperidone (n = 59, 4 mg/day). The efficacy was assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). Safety and tolerability assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events, laboratory tests and electrocardiograms. RESULTS: The primary analysis demonstrated no significant difference between treatment in the two groups (quetiapine vs. risperidone: 31.9 ± 17.5 vs. 33.3 ± 17.3; P = 0.668). Improvements with both treatments were comparable for total PANSS, positive and negative subscores, general psychopathology subscales, and excitement and attack symptoms. Improvements in CGI-S were similar between treatment groups (P = 0.046). A more favorable trend was detected for quetiapine than risperidone in the reduction of CDSS scores from baseline, especially at week 1 (1.1 ± 2.2 vs. 0.3 ± 2.1, P < 0.050). The rate of extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) and hyperprolactinemia-related adverse events was significantly lower in the quetiapine group than the risperidone group (13.3% vs. 43.3%, P < 0.001). Dizziness and somnolence were more common in the quetiapine group than the risperidone group. CONCLUSION: Quetiapine fumarate (750 mg/day) has broad clinical efficacy comparable to 4 mg/day risperidone. Dizziness was common in the quetiapine group (P = 0.029), but the rate of somnolence was similar between the two groups (P = 0.114). EPS and hyperprolactinemia rates were significantly higher with risperidone (P < 0.001). Key limitations of this study include small sample size, short treatment periods, and no increase to 6 mg/day for risperidone because of its safety profile.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".