Effects of Risperidone and Olanzapine Dose Reduction on Cognitive Function in Stable Patients With Schizophrenia: An Open-Label, Randomized, Controlled, Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impact of dose reduction of atypical antipsychotics on cognitive function has not been investigated in stable patients with schizophrenia. In this open-label, 28-week, randomized controlled trial, stable patients with schizophrenia treated with risperidone or olanzapine were randomly assigned to the reduction group (dose reduced by 50% in 4 weeks and then maintained) or maintenance group (dose kept constant). Assessments at baseline and week 28 included the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale (DIEPSS). Sixty-one patients were enrolled; 2 of 31 (6.5%) and 5 of 30 (16.7%) patients prematurely withdrew from the study in the reduction and maintenance groups, respectively. While no significant differences in change in the PANSS total score were observed between the 2 groups, the reduction group showed significantly greater improvements in the RBANS and DIEPSS total scores compared with the maintenance group (mean ± SD, +7.0±7.1 vs -0.1±8.0, P < .001; -0.9±1.7 vs +0.1±1.2, P = .010, respectively). This 6-month pilot study suggests that risperidone or olanzapine dose reduction of 50% can improve cognitive function for stable patients with schizophrenia. Due to the open-label design, small sample size, and short study duration, however, there is a need to confirm the finding through double-blind, larger scale trials with longer follow-up periods. Moreover, potential risks of relapse following antipsychotic dose reduction should be thoroughly investigated in longer term studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".