The Impact of Anticholinergic Burden on Functional Capacity in Persons With Schizophrenia Across the Adult Life Span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anticholinergic burden (ACB) from medications impairs cognition in schizophrenia. Cognition is a predictor of functional capacity; however, little is known about ACB effect on functional capacity in this population. This study assesses the relationship between ACB and functional capacity across the life span in individuals with schizophrenia after controlling for ACB effect on cognition. A cross-sectional analysis was performed with data collected from 6 academic tertiary health centers. Two hundred and twenty-three community-dwelling participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were included in this study. Main variables were ACB, antipsychotic olanzapine equivalents, functional capacity, cognition, and negative symptoms. Simultaneous linear regression analyses were performed to assess the association between ACB, functional capacity, and cognition and then between ACB and cognition. A mediation analysis was then performed to examine whether cognition mediated ACB effect on functional capacity if there was an association between ACB and cognition. Mean age of participants was 49.0 years (SD = 13.1, range 19-79), and 63.7% of participants had severe ACB, ie, a total score of 3 or above. Regression analyses revealed that ACB, age, education, and cognition independently predicted functional capacity and that ACB predicted cognition among those aged 55 years and older. Mediation analysis showed that cognition did partially mediate the effect of ACB on functional capacity in this older cohort. In conclusion, people with schizophrenia are exposed to severe ACB that can have a direct negative impact on functional capacity after controlling for its impact on cognition. Reducing ACB could improve functional capacity and potentially real-world function in 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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".