Switching from olanzapine to ziprasidone:a 12-Week,open-label,multicenter study evaluating the effectiveness and safety of ziprasidone in patients with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of switching to ziprasidone from olanzapine because of inadequate response or intolerance.Methods A total of 100 patients with first-episode or non-refractory schizophrenia(diagnosed according with the criteria of DSM-IV) who had no response to olanzapine or showed poor tolerance to alanzapine were enrolled in a 12-week,open-label,flexible-dose ziprasidone trial.All patients were assessed with Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale(PANSS),Calgary Depression Scale(CDSS),global impression scale(CGI) and Social Functions(SF-12) at baseline and the end of 2nd,4th,8th,12th week to evaluate the efficacy.Extrapyramidal Side Effects Scale(SAS),laboratory examination and electrocardiogram examination were performed to evaluate the safety at baseline and the end of the 4th,8th week of the treatment.Results A total of 86 patients completed the trial.Scores of PANSS,CDSS,CGI and SF-12 all decreased significantly with the advance of the treatment(P0.001).61 complete records of adverse reactions were collected.The most common adverse reaction was extrapyramidal effect(32 cases,36.07%).The prevalence of relatively rare adverse reactions was 16.39%(10 cases),which consisted of agitation(2 cases),nausea(1 case),constipation(1 case),insomnia(1 case),dizziness(1 case),headache(1 case),anxiety(1 case),dry mouth(1 case) and tachycardia(1 case).There were no significant changes in fasting glucose,HbA1c,triglyceride,total cholesterol,prolactin,QTc interval,heart rate at different observation time-points with the advance of the treatment.Conclusion Ziprasidone can improve the clinical symptoms effectively in patients who had no response to olanzapine or showed poor tolerance to alanzapine.Ziprasidone has less adverse reactions and has little effect on metabolism.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".