Dissolution Profile, Tolerability, and Acceptability of the Orally Disintegrating Olanzapine Tablet in Patients with Schizophrenia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This pilot study investigates the dissolution profile, tolerability, and acceptability of an orally disintegrating olanzapine tablet in patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: Eleven patients with schizophrenia stabilized on oral olanzapine (mean dosage 12.7 mg daily [SD5.2]) were given an orally disintegrating olanzapine tablet, rather than their usual tablet, daily for 7 days. At each visit, visual assessments were made for elapsed time to initial disintegration (every 15 seconds) and complete disintegration (every 1 minute). At the end of the study, patients completed a drug-acceptance questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean time to initial disintegration was 15.78 seconds, and mean time to complete disintegration was 0.97 minutes. All patients found the orally disintegrating tablet acceptable and expressed positive comments. Nonserious clinically significant adverse events, asthenia, purpuric rash, headache, depression, and insomnia (preexisting, except for asthenia and insomnia) were reported in 3 patients. CONCLUSION: The orally disintegrating olanzapine tablet disintegrates rapidly and is a well-tolerated and acceptable alternative to standard olanzapine tablets in patients with schizophrenia.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it