Patterns of Antipsychotic Utilization in a Tertiary Care Psychiatric Institution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform a retrospective survey of discharge medications at a tertiary care psychiatric facility in an attempt to gain insight into, and perhaps an understanding of, the most recent pattern of antipsychotic utilization in patients with a diagnosis not restricted to schizophrenia. METHODS: This is a retrospective survey that used the Department of Pharmacy's computer database to obtain relevant discharge information on all non-geriatric patients discharged from Riverview Hospital between 1 January and 31 December 2000. The records of 372 patients met the inclusion criteria and formed the database for the survey. RESULTS: The results of this survey revealed a relatively high prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy (the use of two antipsychotics). Perhaps surprisingly, the highest rate of antipsychotic polypharmacy was found in individuals diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder (49.3%), followed by schizophrenia (44.7%), bipolar disorder (29.9%), and psychosis not otherwise specified (22.5%). CONCLUSION: Although antipsychotic polypharmacy is not a new phenomenon in schizophrenia, this study is the first to document its employment among other diagnoses.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".