Dietary modification in the treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia spectrum disorders impact functioning, reduce quality of life and increase the risk of physical illness and premature mortality. Nutritional intervention studies aimed at decreasing body weight have demonstrated efficacy in improving metabolic outcomes; however, few studies have explored the impact of interventions designed to modify diet on mental health outcomes. AIM: To synthesize the existing experimental studies of adjunctive diet modification as an intervention in the treatment of psychotic disorders, analyze findings related to effectiveness and safety, highlight knowledge gaps and limitations, and set forward recommendations for future research studies. METHODS: An extensive a priori search strategy was developed and the databases Embase, Embase Classic, Ovid MEDLINE were searched. Screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. Studies included in this analysis were experimental studies of an adjunctive dietary intervention (overall dietary pattern or education on dietary change) for treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. No restrictions were placed on control groups or blinding. The studies were required to report a mental health outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-five clinical trials were identified, along with two additional protocols and two meta-analyses. Nineteen of the clinical trials reported improvement in one or more mental health domain including psychosis symptoms, cognition, and quality of life. A high level of heterogeneity was found with respect to patient population, intervention, and study design. All of the studies included lifestyle or psychosocial components in addition to dietary modification. The nutrition advice provided to participants was poorly described overall and compliance was not assessed. The studies that showed benefit tended to have a smaller sample size and were less likely to be randomized but were more likely to use a group delivery intervention. CONCLUSION: Further research assessing effectiveness and efficacy of clearly reported dietary interventions is warranted, especially those using rigorous methodology, modifying diet in isolation and assessing participant compliance.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".