Treatment-emergent adverse events associated with atypical antipsychotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Atypical antipsychotics provide broad-spectrum effectiveness for the acute and/or preventative treatment of disparate psychiatric disorders. Atypical antipsychotics offer improved efficacy in some psychopathological domains when compared with typical antipsychotics. Notwithstanding, atypicals are not a catholicon and are associated with clinically significant and treatment-limiting side effects (e.g., extrapyramidal symptoms and weight gain). AREAS COVERED: This article reviews commonly encountered adverse events attributable to the use of atypical antipsychotic agents. This review aims to provide a current overview of common adverse events associated with atypical agents with a particular emphasis on adverse events that frequently lead to treatment discontinuation (e.g., changes in weight, metabolism, extrapyramidal side effects, neuroendocrine changes, blood dyscrasias, and cardiovascular toxicity). EXPERT OPINION: Atypicals are not a catholicon and are associated with clinically significant and treatment-limiting side effects (e.g., extrapyramidal symptoms and weight gain). Improving the utility of these agents requires a familiarity and understanding of the heterogeneous tolerability and safety profiles of atypical agents as well as the therapeutic evidence for their efficacy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".