MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229058069 · doi:10.1002/wps.20977

Reappraising the variability of effects of antipsychotic medication in schizophrenia: a meta‐analysis

2022· article· en· W4229058069 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert A. McCutcheon, Toby Pillinger, Orestis Efthimiou, Marta M. Maslej, Benoit H. Mulsant, Allan H. Young, Andrea Cipriani, Oliver Howes

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMedical Research CouncilKing's College LondonCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungMaudsley CharityWellcome TrustUniversity of TorontoSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation TrustNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AntipsychoticPlaceboMedicinePositive and Negative Syndrome ScaleMeta-analysisPsychiatryCorrelationInternal medicineClinical trialClinical psychologyPsychosisAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is common experience for practising psychiatrists that individuals with schizophrenia vary markedly in their symptomatic response to antipsychotic medication. What is not clear, however, is whether this variation reflects variability of medication-specific effects (also called "treatment effect heterogeneity"), as opposed to variability of non-specific effects such as natural symptom fluctuation or placebo response. Previous meta-analyses found no evidence of treatment effect heterogeneity, suggesting that a "one size fits all" approach may be appropriate and that efforts at developing personalized treatment strategies for schizophrenia are unlikely to succeed. Recent advances indicate, however, that earlier approaches may have been unable to accurately quantify treatment effect heterogeneity due to their neglect of a key parameter: the correlation between placebo response and medication-specific effects. In the present paper, we address this shortcoming by using individual patient data and study-level data to estimate that correlation and quantitatively characterize antipsychotic treatment effect heterogeneity in schizophrenia. Individual patient data (on 384 individuals who were administered antipsychotic treatment and 88 who received placebo) were obtained from the Yale University Open Data Access (YODA) database. Study-level data were obtained from a meta-analysis of 66 clinical trials including 17,202 patients. Both individual patient and study-level analyses yielded a negative correlation between placebo response and treatment effect for the total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) (ρ=-0.32, p=0.002 and ρ=-0.39, p<0.001, respectively). Using the most conservative of these estimates, a meta-analysis of treatment effect heterogeneity provided evidence of a marked variability in antipsychotic-specific effects between individuals with schizophrenia, with the top quartile of patients experiencing beneficial treatment effects of 17.7 points or more on the PANSS total score, while the bottom quartile presented a detrimental effect of treatment relative to placebo. This evidence of clinically meaningful treatment effect heterogeneity suggests that efforts to personalize antipsychotic treatment of schizophrenia have potential for success.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.100
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.100
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0230.074
Bibliometrics0.0130.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations49
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207