MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of the metabolic and economic consequences of long‐term treatment of schizophrenia using ziprasidone, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone in Canada: a cost‐effectiveness analysis

2010· article· en· W2112815323 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roger S. McIntyre, Lael Cragin, Sonja Sorensen, Huseyin Naci, Tim Baker, Jean‐Pascal Roussy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsPfizer (Canada)University of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZiprasidoneQuetiapineOlanzapineRisperidoneMedicineAtypical antipsychoticAntipsychoticPsychiatryQuality-adjusted life yearSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Cost effectiveness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Second-generation antipsychotic agents have varying propensities to cause weight gain, elevated lipid levels and associated long-term complications. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of four second-generation antipsychotic agents used in Canada for the treatment of schizophrenia (ziprasidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone) with a focus on their long-term metabolic consequences. METHOD: Using data from the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness Study, a semi-Markov model was developed to predict the incidence and associated costs of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular complications (e.g. angina, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular disease death), and acute psychiatric hospitalizations in patients with chronic schizophrenia treated over 5 years. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained were calculated from the perspective of the Canadian provincial ministries of health. Scenario and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The total average cost of treatment with ziprasidone was $25,301 versus $28,563 with olanzapine, $26,233 with quetiapine and $21,831 with risperidone. Ziprasidone had the lowest predicted number of type 2 diabetes cases and cardiovascular disease events, and the highest QALY gains. Patients receiving quetiapine had the highest predicted number of hospitalizations. Ziprasidone was less costly and resulted in more QALYs compared with olanzapine and quetiapine. Compared with risperidone, ziprasidone was more costly and had higher QALYs, with an incremental cost per QALY gained of $218,060. CONCLUSION: Compared with olanzapine and quetiapine, ziprasidone produced savings to the health care system. Although ziprasidone generated incremental expenditures versus risperidone, it resulted in more QALYs. Based on this analysis, ziprasidone treatment possesses cost and therapeutic advantages compared with olanzapine and 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations29
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical PracticeSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207