Clinicians’ adherence to clinical practice guidelines for cardiac function monitoring during antipsychotic treatment: a retrospective report on 434 patients with severe mental illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Severe mental illness (SMI) has considerable excess morbidity and mortality, a proportion of which is explained by cardiovascular diseases, caused in part by antipsychotic (AP) induced QT-related arrhythmias and sudden death by Torsade de Point (TdP). The implementation of evidence-based recommendations for cardiac function monitoring might reduce the incidence of these AP-related adverse events. To investigate clinicians' adherence to cardiac function monitoring before and after starting AP, we performed a retrospective assessment of 434 AP-treated SMI patients longitudinally followed-up for 5 years at an academic community mental health center. METHODS: We classified antipsychotics according to their risk of inducing QT-related arrhythmias and TdP (Center for Research on Therapeutics, University of Arizona). We used univariate tests and multinomial or binary logistic regression model for data analysis. RESULTS: Univariate and multinomial regression analysis showed that psychiatrists were more likely to perform pre-treatment electrocardiogram (ECG) and electrolyte testing with AP carrying higher cardiovascular risk, but not on the basis of AP pharmacological class. Univariate and binomial regression analysis showed that cardiac function parameters (ECG and electrolyte balance) were more frequently monitored during treatment with second generation AP than with first generation AP. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show the presence of weaknesses in the cardiac function monitoring of AP-treated SMI patients, and might guide future interventions to tackle them.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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".