Bibliographic record
Abstract
concerning newly approved antipsychotic medication.We summarised information about pharmacodynamic effects, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and tolerance of described medications.Conclusions.Newly approved antipsychotic medication seem to give hope of improvement of treatment efficacy, especially with regards to negative, cognitive and depress ive symptoms of schizophrenia.They also seem to be bet ter tolerated than previously available antipsychotics. StreSzczenieCel. Celem pracy było przedstawienie informacji do tyczących mechanizmów działania, farmakokinetyki, skuteczności klinicznej oraz tolerancji nowych leków przeciwpsychotycznych -lurasidonu, brekspipra zolu, kariprazyny, lumateperonu i pimawanseryny -a także porównanie ich z dotychczas dostępnymi preparatami.Przegląd piśmiennictwa.Dokonano przeglądu badań klinicznych, przedklinicznych, przeglądu literatury oraz metaanaliz dotyczących opisanych leków.Podsumowano informacje dotyczące efektów farmakodynamicznych, farmakokinetyki, skuteczności klinicznej oraz tolerancji opisanych leków.Wnioski.Opisane w artykule leki wydają się dawać nadzieję na poprawę skuteczności leczenia schizofre nii, szczególnie w zakresie jej objawów negatywnych, poznawczych i depresyjnych.Wydają się również lepiej tolerowane niż dotychczas stosowane preparaty. AbStrActObjectives.The objective of this article was to present in formation concerning mechanisms of action, pharmaco kinetics, clinical efficacy and tolerance of newly approved antipsychotic medication -lurasidone, brexpiprazole, cariprazine, lumateperone and pimavanserin -and to compare them with previously available ones.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.104 | 0.049 |
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".