P.047 Successful management of Parkinsonism in a schizophrenic patient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: D2 receptor antagonists have been a mainstay in treating schizophrenia. Dopamine agonists used in the treatment of Parkinsonism can aggravate psychosis. Dopaminergic drugs with emphasis on other receptor subtypes with less D2 activation could reduce Parkinsonism in schizophrenic patients without seriously aggravating Parkinsonism. Rotigitine acts primarily on D3 receptors, while activity on other dopamine receptors is 8-20 times less. We report the successful treatment of a schizophenic patient with rotigitine and contend that its effectiveness relates to rotigitine’s receptor profile. Methods: Single case study with follow-up. Results: A 67 year old woman with longstanding schizophrenia developed severe, progressive Parkinsonian features over 2 years despite stable antipsychotic therapy. More than one tablet of levodopa-carbidopa 100/25 precipitated psychosis. Risperidone was changed to cloazapine without benefit in Parkinsonism. The rotigitine patch was introduced and increased to 8 mg/24 hours without aggravating her mental status and produced considerable improvement in Parkinsonian features. Conclusions: Rotigitine is worth exploring as a treatment for severe Parkinsonism 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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".