MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2948002817 · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00314

Hypofunctional Dopamine Uptake and Antipsychotic Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia

2019· review· en· W2948002817 on OpenAlexaff
Davide Amato, Anna Kruyer, Anne‐Noël Samaha, Andreas Heinz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychiatry · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institutes of HealthDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
KeywordsAntipsychoticSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)DopaminergicDopaminePsychiatryMedicinePsychologyDopamine hypothesis of schizophreniaNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antipsychotic treatment resistance in schizophrenia remains a major issue in psychiatry. Nearly 30% of patients with schizophrenia do not respond to antipsychotic treatment, yet the underlying neurobiological causes are unknown. All effective antipsychotic medications are thought to achieve their efficacy by targeting the dopaminergic system. Here we review early literature describing the fundamental mechanisms of antipsychotic drug efficacy, highlighting mechanistic concepts that have persisted over time. We then reconsider the original framework for understanding antipsychotic efficacy in light of recent advances in our scientific understanding of the dopaminergic effects of antipsychotics. Based on these new insights, we describe a role for the dopamine transporter in the genesis of both antipsychotic therapeutic response and primary resistance. We believe that this discussion will help delineate the dopaminergic nature of antipsychotic treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207