MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096544065 · doi:10.1080/13546805.2012.760917

Clozapine and visuospatial processing in treatment-resistant schizophrenia

2013· article· en· W2096544065 on OpenAlexafffund
Josiane Bourque, Nadia Lakis, Julie Champagne, Émmanuel Stip, Pierre Lalonde, Olivier Lipp, Adrianna Mendrek

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Neuropsychiatry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalBishop's UniversityHôpital Louis-H Lafontaine
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyClozapineCognitionFunctional magnetic resonance imagingAudiologyMental rotationPsychiatryNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Clozapine, the most widely used option in treatment-resistant schizophrenia, has been shown to be superior to other antipsychotic medications in improving cognitive function in patients. However, the results have not been consistent and the mechanisms underlying this effect have not been elucidated. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to evaluate verbal and nonverbal cognition (using visuospatial processing tests) in patients treated with clozapine (initially treatment resistant) and those treated with other second-generation antipsychotics, relative healthy control subjects. Furthermore, we examined neural correlates of visuospatial processing in the three groups. METHODS: Twenty schizophrenia patients treated with clozapine (TR-C group), 23 patients stabilised with atypical antipsychotics other than clozapine (NTR group), and 21 healthy control participants completed a battery of verbal and visuospatial cognitive tests. In addition, participants underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while performing one of the visuospatial tests (the mental rotation task). The fMRI data were analysed separately in each group using Statistical Parametric Mapping software (SPM5). RESULTS: Overall, schizophrenia patients exhibited deficit on verbal and nonverbal processing relative to the healthy controls, but we observed some interesting differences between the two groups of patients. Specifically, the NTR group performed better than the TR-C group on the Block Design and the Raven's Progressive Matrices. With respect to brain function during mental rotation, the NTR group showed significant activations in regions of the temporal and occipital cortex, whereas the TR-C patients did not. The relative deactivations associated with the task were also more robust in NTR compared to the other group of patients, despite a similar performance. CONCLUSION: Present results suggest better visuospatial processing in the NTR relative to the TR-C group. This difference could be attributed to the treatment resistance itself or a lack of beneficial effect of clozapine relative to other atypical antipsychotics in ameliorating nonverbal abilities. Future studies of the relationship between clozapine and cognition, as well as between treatment resistance and cognition, are warranted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive NeuropsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207