Antipsychotic Use in Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antipsychotics are necessary for many older adults to treat major mental illnesses or reduce distressing psychiatric symptoms. Current controversy exists over the role of antipsychotics in the management of neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in persons with dementia. Although some NPS may be appropriately and safely treated with antipsychotics, a fine balance must be achieved between the benefits of these medications, which are often modest, and adverse events, which may have significant consequences. Approximately one-third of all persons with dementia are currently prescribed antipsychotic medications, and there is significant variation in the use of antipsychotics across care settings and providers. Reducing the inappropriate or unnecessary use of antipsychotics among persons with dementia has been the focus of increasing attention owing to better awareness of the potential problems associated with these medications. Several approaches can be used to curb the use of antipsychotics among persons with dementia, including policy or regulatory changes, public reporting, and educational outreach. Recently, there has been encouraging evidence of a downward trend in the use of antipsychotics in many long-term care settings, although prescribing rates are still higher than what is likely optimal. Although reducing the inappropriate use of antipsychotics is a complex task, psychiatrists can play an important role via the provision of clinical care and research evidence, contributing to improved care of persons with dementia in Canada and elsewhere.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".