Prevalence of metabolic syndrome in a population served by assertive community treatment teams: a retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is defined as the co-occurrence of risk factors for both type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. This includes abdominal obesity, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. MetS is associated with significant morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular events and from all-cause mortality. MetS occurs at a higher rate in patients with serious mental illness compared to the general population. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to determine the MetS prevalence and antipsychotic prescribing patterns for patients followed by 2 assertive community treatment teams (ACTTs; n=59). MetS criteria including blood pressure, body mass index, waist circumference, fasting cholesterol, and fasting blood sugar levels were extracted. Additional information including patient demographics, psychiatric diagnosis, and prescription medications were also collected and analyzed. Results: The prevalence of the MetS among ACTT patients was 52.5%. The use of the metabolically favorable antipsychotic aripiprazole (n=10) remains limited in this population. There were no patients in this sample who were prescribed ziprasidone, lurasidone, or asenapine, all of which are associated with limited metabolic side effects. Conclusion: MetS is prevalent among patients with severe and persistent mental illness followed by ACTTs. Despite the high rate of MetS in this patient population, the use of antipsychotics with favorable metabolic profiles remains limited. Keywords: metabolic syndrome, atypical antipsychotics, severe and persistent mental illness
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".