Sex-stratified mortality estimates in people with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of 2,700,825 people with schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The differential influence of sex on premature mortality in schizophrenia is unclear. This study assessed the differences in all-cause and specific cause mortality risks in people with schizophrenia compared to several control groups stratified by sex. We conducted a PRISMA 2020-compliant systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of cohort studies assessing mortality relative risk (RR) for people with schizophrenia, comparing by sex. We measured publication bias and conducted a quality assessment through the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We meta-analyzed 43 studies reporting on 2,700,825 people with schizophrenia. Both males and females with schizophrenia had increased all-cause mortality vs. comparison groups (males, RR=2.62, 95%CI 2.35-2.92; females, RR=2.56, 95%CI 2.27-2.87), suicide (males, RR=9.02, 95%CI 5.96-13.67; females, RR=12.09, 95%CI 9.00-16.25), and natural cause mortality (males, RR=2.11, 95%CI 1.88-2.38; females, RR=2.14, 95%CI 1.93-2.38). No statistically significant differences in sex-dependent mortality risk emerged. There was an age-group-dependent increased mortality risk in females < 40 years vs. >/=40 years old (RR=4.23/2.17), and significantly higher risk of death due to neurological disorders (dementia) in males vs. females (RR=5.19/2.40). Increased mortality risks were often associated with specific modifiable risk factors. The increased mortality risk did not improve over time, calling for more studies to identify modifiable factors, and for better physical healthcare for males and females 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".