MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406439500 · doi:10.4103/atmr.atmr_216_24

Efficacy of Aripiprazole in Enhancing Cognitive Functions in Psychiatric Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4406439500 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ghadi Eyad Alnajjar, Renad Khalid Alsalamah, Sultan Sulaiman Aldughayim, Mostafa Habeeb Alhodibi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Trends in Medical Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAripiprazoleCognitionPsychiatryMeta-analysisPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychotherapistInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Psychiatric disorders have many symptoms including decline in cognitive symptoms. Parkinson’s disease significantly affects the patient quality of life. Aripiprazole, which is atypical antipsychotic, has a unique mechanism of action that may improve cognitive functions due to its activity at dopamine D2 receptors. Materials and Methods: We adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines and conducted a comprehensive search across many databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library. We focused on randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that investigated the cognitive effects of Aripiprazole. Data from selected studies were extracted and analysed using RevMan and we used ROB2 and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale tools for quality and bias assessment. Results: Our meta-analysis included 751 patients from nine studies. Results indicated that Aripiprazole significantly improved working memory (standardised mean difference [SMD] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.18, 0.78], P = 0.002) and cognitive flexibility as measured by Trails A (SMD − 0.27, 95% CI [−0.49, −0.05], P = 0.02) and the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test Perseverations errors (SMD − 0.42, 95% CI [−0.69, −0.15], P = 0.003). However, no significant changes were observed in verbal learning (SMD 0.15, 95% CI [−0.10, 0.40], P = 0.23), verbal fluency (SMD − 0.05, 95% CI [−0.32, 0.22], P = 0.71) or performance in Trails B (SMD 0.10, 95% CI [−0.25, 0.45], P = 0.58). The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised Digit Symbol test also showed no significant improvement (SMD − 0.02, 95% CI [−0.28, 0.24], P = 0.86). Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated that Aripiprazole has a significant positive effect on specific cognitive functions such as working memory and cognitive flexibility in psychiatric patients. This supports its role in utility as a cognitive enhancer.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.045
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.391 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced Trends in Medical ResearchSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207