The Relationship Between Sexual Dysfunctions With Disease Prolactin and Genetic Polymorphisms in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder Patients Receiving Pharmacotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to investigate sexual dysfunctions (SDs) and related factors in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder receiving pharmacotherapy. METHODS: This study included 111 patients. The Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) were applied to the schizophrenia, and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) to the bipolar patient group. The sociodemographic data form and the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX) were applied to both of the patient groups. Blood was drawn from all patients to evaluate the indicated gene polymorphisms and evaluate prolactin levels. RESULTS: SD was detected in 45.9% (N = 34) of the schizophrenia group, and 59.5% (N = 22) in the bipolar disorder group. SD was significantly higher in elderly patients and patients with a high smoking amount and low education levels. The eNOS -786T>C T allele frequency was found to be significantly higher in patients with SD. The logistic regression analysis determined that eNOS -786T>C CT and TT genotypes increased the risk of SD. CONCLUSION: In this study, the high rates of SD in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and the presence of modifiable factors that influence the presence of SD, suggest that SD should be given more attention in these patient groups. On the other hand, the high rate of SD in patients with the eNOS -786T>C T allele indicates the importance of carrying out new studies investigating the factors affecting the enzyme activity in this genotype. There is a need for more studies on eNOS genotypes and enzyme activites in this area.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".