MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537702573 · doi:10.4088/jcp.15m10247

Persistence in Therapy With Risperidone and Aripiprazole in Pediatric Outpatients

2016· article· en· W2537702573 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Pozzi, Simone Pisano, Silvana Bertella, Annalisa Capuano, Renata Rizzo, Stefania Antoniazzi, Fabiana Auricchio, Carla Carnovale, Dario Cattaneo, Carmen Ferrajolo, Marta Gentili, Giuseppe Guastella, Elisa Mani, Concetta Rafaniello, Maria Pia Riccio, Maria Grazia Scuderi, Serena Sperandeo, Liberata Sportiello, Laura Villa, Sonia Radice, Emilio Clementi, Francesco Rossi, Antonio Pascotto, Renato Bernardini, Massimo Molteni, Carmela Bravaccio

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsChild, Adolescent and Family Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAripiprazoleRisperidoneQuetiapineDiscontinuationOlanzapineMedicineInternal medicineExtrapyramidal symptomsPopulationPsychiatryPediatricsHazard ratioConcomitantPsychologyAntipsychoticSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Confidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The practical effectiveness of second-generation antipsychotics in children and adolescents is an understudied issue. It is a crucial area of study, though, because such patients are often treated for long-lasting disorders. METHODS: We carried out a 24-month (March 2012-March 2014) observational study on an unselected population of pediatric outpatients treated with risperidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, or quetiapine aiming to (1) describe drug use, (2) compare post hoc the discontinuation rates due to specific causes and dose adjustments by Kaplan-Meier analyses between drugs, and (3) analyze predictors influencing these outcomes by Cox multivariate models. RESULTS: Among 184 pediatric patients, 77% patients were prescribed risperidone, and 18% were prescribed aripiprazole. Olanzapine or quetiapine were scantly used; therefore, they were excluded from analyses. Risperidone was prevalent in younger, male patients with disruptive behavioral disorders; aripiprazole, in patients with tic disorders. Overall, discontinuations occurred mostly in the first 6 months, and, at 24 months, the discontinuation numbers were similar between users of risperidone and aripiprazole (41.5% vs 39.4%). In univariate analyses, dose reduction was higher for aripiprazole (P = .033). Multivariate analyses yielded the following predictors: for all-cause discontinuation, baseline severity (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.48, P = .001) and dose increase (HR = 3.55, P = .001); for patient-decided discontinuation, dose change (increase: HR = 6.43, P = .004; reduction: HR = 7.89, P = .049) and the presence of concomitant drugs (HR = 4.03, P = .034), while autistic patients discontinued less (HR = 0.23, P = .050); for clinician-decided discontinuation due to adverse drug reactions, baseline severity (HR = 1.96, P = .005) and dose increase (HR = 5.09, P = .016); for clinician-decided discontinuation due to inefficacy, baseline severity (HR = 2.88, P = .014) and the use of aripiprazole (HR = 5.55, P = .013); for dose increase, none; for dose reduction, the occurrence of adverse drug reactions (HR = 4.74, P = .046), while dose reduction was less probable in autistic patients (HR = 0.22, P = .042). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study show a similarity between the overall effectiveness of risperidone and aripiprazole in a real-life pediatric outpatient setting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.073
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207