MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396705661 · doi:10.1007/s40263-024-01089-w

Sex Differences Between Female and Male Individuals in Antipsychotic Efficacy and Adverse Effects in the Treatment of Schizophrenia

2024· article· en· W4396705661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Megan Galbally, Karen Wynter, Dan Siskind, Christoph U. Correll, Korinne Northwood, Susanna Every‐Palmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Drugs · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthMonash University
KeywordsPsychopharmacologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Adverse effectAntipsychoticPsychiatryMedicinePsychologyInternal medicineNeurologyClozapine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Antipsychotics are core treatments for people living with psychotic disorders. Understanding individualised factors that influence both efficacy and adverse responses will improve outcomes. The objective of this study was to examine sex differences in antipsychotic-related efficacy and tolerability. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of data from phase 1 and 1a of Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE); participants with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to double-blinded treatment with oral olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone or perphenazine. Measures included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale and Calgary Depression Rating Scale, as well as self-reported side effects, medication compliance, dosage, weight measurements and various blood parameters. RESULTS: There were 1460 participants including 380 female and 1080 male individuals. Very few differences existed between male and female participants in response, adverse reactions, compliance or antipsychotic dosage. However, significantly more female participants than male participants reported constipation (28% vs 16%), dry mouth (50% vs 38%), gynecomastia/galactorrhea (11% vs 3%), incontinence/nocturia (16% vs 8%) and self reported weight gain (37% vs 24%) [all p < 0.001]. Within the risperidone treatment group, there was a significantly greater increase in prolactin levels (p < 0.001) among female participants (n = 61) than male participants (n = 159). No overall differences in clinician-rated measures, weight gain or other laboratory indicators were found. CONCLUSIONS: While overall sex differences were limited across efficacy and tolerability for antipsychotic treatment, there were some specific findings with risperidone. Further examination of sex differences within antipsychotic trials will be important to improve efficacy and reduce adverse responses across as well as individualising care for people with schizophrenia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS DrugsSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207