Control Study between Quetiapine and Risperidone in the Treatment of Schizophrenia at Three Monnths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To compare the therapeutic effects and side effects between quetiapine and risperidone in the treating of schizophrenia.Methods The positive and negative symptom scale(PANSS) and Calgary depression scale were used for schizophrenia(CDSS),the therapeutic effects and side effects were evaluated in 96 cases schizophrenic patients treated with quetiapine and 126 cases patients with risperidone,before therapy and the 2nd,4th,8th,12th weeks after treatment,respectively.Results The total response rates showed no significant difference between two groups.However,the recovery rates of quetiapine group showed modest higher than that of risperidone group(16.7% vs 8.7%,P=0.045).The negative and depressive factoral scores of PANSS,and the CDSS scores in quetiapine group were signifficant higher than those in risperidone group(P0.05).On the other hand,the prevalence of extra pyramidal system(EPS),such as akathisia,tremor and total EPS events in quetiapine group was significantly lower than in risperidone group.Conclusion The therapeutic effects and side effects through 3-month therapy of quetiapine showed different from those of risperidone.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".