Baseline Antipsychotic Dose and Transition to Psychosis in Individuals at Clinical High Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Emerging meta-analytical evidence indicates that baseline exposure to antipsychotics is associated with an increased risk of transitioning to psychosis in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-P) and that such effect is not a result of pretest risk enrichment. However, to maximize its translational utility for prognostic stratification in clinical practice, testing for the potential presence of a dose-response association is crucial. Objective: To test whether the negative prognostic effect of baseline antipsychotic exposure in individuals at CHR-P follows a dose-effect pattern, as indicated by mean chlorpromazine equivalent doses (CPZ-ED). Data Sources: MEDLINE and Cochrane Library, performed up to August 31, 2023, searching for English-language studies on individuals at CHR-P reporting data on exposure to antipsychotics at baseline and detailed information on dosage by transition status. Study Selection: Studies that provided information on antipsychotic exposure at baseline and included detailed dosage data categorized by transition status. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Eligible studies were identified following PRISMA guidelines and evaluated independently by 2 reviewers with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was transition to psychosis in individuals at CHR-P who were receiving antipsychotic treatment at baseline, measured by baseline mean CPZ-ED in individuals at CHR-P who transitioned to psychosis compared to those who did not. Results: Eight studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Among 290 individuals at CHR-P (mean [SD] age, 19.4 [2.6] years) who were exposed to antipsychotics at baseline and remained in contact up to the completion of the study, 66 converted to psychosis and 224 did not. The mean CPZ-ED ranged 60 to 395 mg/d in those who converted and 13 to 224 mg/d in those who did not. Those who converted to psychosis had higher CPZ-ED than those who did not in both the common-effects model (Hedges g, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.12-0.70; z, 2.78; P = .005) and in the random-effects model (Hedges g, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.15-0.67; z, 3.69; P = .008; τ2, 0.0). There was no relevant heterogeneity (Cochran Q, 3.99; df, 7; P = .78; I2, 0.0%; 95% CI, 0.0-68.0). The radial plot indicated a good fit of the model. Conclusions and Relevance: In individuals at CHR-P who were exposed to antipsychotics at baseline, those receiving higher antipsychotic doses demonstrated an increased likelihood of transitioning to psychosis. This meta-analytic evidence of putative dose-effect association confirms that baseline antipsychotic exposure and the corresponding dosage carry salient prognostic information that could improve current CHR-P criteria-based risk stratification at inception.
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 | 0.014 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".