Safety and related factors of treatment with long‐term atypical antipsychotic in Chinese patients with schizophrenia: observational study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics as first-line drugs have been used in patients with schizophrenia in China and abroad. However, its safety still needs to be evaluated in a large population, especially in Chinese patients. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and related factors of long-term atypical antipsychotic use in patients with schizophrenia in China. The secondary objective includes the long-term efficacy of atypical antipsychotics in these patients, as well as pharmacoeconomic evaluation, population pharmacokinetic studies and pharmacogenomics studies. METHODS: This study has an observational design. The atypical antipsychotics include quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone, aripiprazole, ziprasidone, paliperidone, amisulpride, perospirone and clozapine. Visits occur at 0, 4, 8, 13, 26, 52, 78, 104, 130 and 156 weeks. The efficacy evaluations include symptoms, social function, recurrence rate and hospitalisation. The safety measures include physical examination, vital signs, abdominal circumference, laboratory tests (such as blood cell analysis, blood biochemical tests and serum prolactin/thyroxine levels), 12-lead ECG, extrapyramidal syndrome assessment, sexual function evaluation, medication and other adverse events. The secondary measures include the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness Scale, Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia, Personal and Social Performance Scale, relapse rate, drug consolidation, medical-related expenses, income, drug plasma concentration and genetic information. RESULTS: This is a large sample, non-interventional and long-term prospective clinical study designed to truly reflect the specific details of clinical practice, fully respect patients' needs, and understand patients' treatment intentions and actual treatment details. CONCLUSIONS: This research method details the aims, methods, study design, strengths and limitations of the study.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it