1057 – Evaluation Of Quality Of Life, Psychosocial Functioning, And Medication Adherence Among Patients Switched To Lurasidone From Other Antipsychotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Patient reported outcomes (PROs), i.e. quality of life (QoL), psychosocial functioning and medication adherence are vital assessments of results in schizophrenia treatment. Objectives Quality of life, psychosocial functioning and adherence attitude were evaluated among adult patients with schizophrenia switched from current antipsychotics to lurasidone, using the Personal Evaluation of Transitions in Treatment (PETiT) scale, a PRO measure. Aims Evaluate PROs after switching to lurasidone. Methods Stable but symptomatic adult outpatients with schizophrenia were switched from their previous antipsychotics to lurasidone, in a 6-week, open-label trial. Subjective responses to antipsychotic therapy were evaluated at baseline and study endpoint using PETiT (Higher scores=better outcomes). Score change was obtained for all patients and those switched from “sedating” (olanzapine, quetiapine) or “non-sedating” (risperidone, aripriprazole, ziprasidone, others) agents. Change from baseline to endpoint in total (overall QoL) and subscale scores (psychosocial functioning, adherence attitude) were compared using ANCOVA. Results Of the 244 patients switched to lurasidone, 213 had available data. Changes from baseline in mean total PETiT score (3.2, P< 0.0001) and subscale scores of psychosocial functioning (2.5) and adherence attitude (0.7) were reported in all patient groups (p< 0.001). Improvement in mean total PETiT score was observed in patients switched from non-sedating (3.5, n=139) and sedating (2.7, n=74) antipsychotics and was statistically significant (P< 0.0001) in the non-sedating group. Differences in statistical significance (sedating vs non-sedating) may arise from smaller changes, not sample size. Conclusions In this study, patients switching to lurasidone experienced improvement in QoL, psychosocial functioning and adherence attitude.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".