Antipsychotic initiation among adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Ontario: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe factors associated with initiating antipsychotics and patterns of persistence to antipsychotic therapy in a large cohort of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) in Ontario. OUTCOME MEASURES: We used multivariable logistic regression to investigate patient characteristics associated with antipsychotic initiation. Patient characteristics studied included sociodemographic characteristics, measures of clinical comorbidity and health service use. RESULTS: Among 39 244 individuals eligible for this study, 6924 (17.6%) initiated an antipsychotic over the accrual window, of whom 1863 (26.9%) had no psychiatric diagnosis in the prior 2 years. A number of factors were significantly associated with antipsychotic initiation, including male gender, residence in a group home, prior use of benzodiazepines, antidepressants or cognitive enhancers, a recent emergency department visit or mental health hospitalisation and a visit to a psychiatrist or family physician in the prior 90 days. In a secondary analysis, the association between antipsychotic initiation and age, prior diagnosis of diabetes or myocardial infarction and polypharmacy differed slightly on the basis of whether an individual had a previously diagnosed psychiatric disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Factors associated with the initiation of an antipsychotic differ according to the presence of a psychiatric diagnosis. Given the long duration of antipsychotic use in this population, future research is needed to understand the appropriateness of antipsychotic initiation among adults with IDD and the safety implications of long-term use of these products.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".