The use of brexpiprazole amongst individuals with insufficient outcomes with aripiprazole or bupropion: A case series
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We sought to characterize the clinical experience of outpatients treated with brexpiprazole after achieving suboptimal outcomes with aripiprazole or bupropion as determined by the treating psychiatric provider. DESIGN AND METHODS: Case series; inefficacy, intolerability, or other unsatisfactory outcome to previous trial with aripiprazole or bupropion. FINDINGS: The majority of individuals in our sample exhibited tolerability of brexpiprazole. In addition, reduction in mean PHQ-9 scores was observed with brexpiprazole treatment. IMPLICATIONS: The results of our preliminary analysis suggest that a subpopulation of adults who have insufficient outcomes on aripiprazole or bupropion due to intolerability, inefficacy or other unsatisfactory outcome may benefit by switching to brexpiprazole treatment. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed, as well as sophisticated network analysis to further understand efficacy and tolerability differences between atypical antipsychotics.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it