BPRS domains, items and subgroups analyses, and CGI-I ratings in pooled data from non-interventional studies of aripiprazole once-monthly in schizophrenia (REACT study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia may benefit from treatment with long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations of antipsychotics. Aripiprazole once-monthly (AOM) is an LAI that was tested in two non-interventional studies in Germany and Canada. METHODS: Here, we report on analyses of pooled data from the two non-interventional studies. Patients were treated with AOM under real-life conditions. Data were analyzed for a timeframe of 6 months. We analyzed data on Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) domains and items, BPRS total scores in various patient subgroups (male vs. female patients, patients with disease duration ≤ 5 years and > 5 years, patients with different levels of disease severity at baseline), Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) ratings for the total population and subgroups, and comorbidities for the total population. RESULTS: Data from 409 patients were included. 65.5% of the patients had comorbidities. Improvements were found in all BPRS domains and items. Furthermore, improvements were similar for male and female patients, patients with disease duration ≤ 5 years and > 5 years, and across different levels of disease severity at baseline. Numerically, more favorable results were found for younger patients, female patients, and those with shorter disease duration. CONCLUSIONS: AOM can be an effective treatment in the broad range of patients, across sexes, regardless of patient age and duration of disease, independently of disease severity, and across symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02131415 (May 6, 2014), vfa non-interventional studies registry 15960N.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 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".