MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416466577 · doi:10.1080/03007995.2025.2585558

Understanding patient, caregiver, and prescriber preferences for an antipsychotic regimen administered once every 2 months for schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder: a qualitative interview study in North America

2025· article· en· W4416466577 on OpenAlexaffabout
Roger S. McIntyre, Murat Yıldırım, Stephanie Loomer, Clodagh Beckham, Dawn Bates, Arun Micheelsen, Kristine Harrsen, Soma S. Nag, Xavier Guillaume, Pedro Such

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Medical Research and Opinion · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersH. Lundbeck A/SOtsuka Pharmaceutical
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Qualitative researchAntipsychoticRegimenSchizophrenia researchBipolar disorderYoung adult

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative interview study explored the preferences of people living with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder (BP-I), caregivers, and prescribers regarding the features of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, as well as factors influencing preferences for a hypothetical LAI administered once every 2 months. METHODS: Trained moderators conducted online video interviews with stable adult patients with schizophrenia or BP-I receiving a once-monthly LAI, caregivers, and prescribers in the United States and Canada. The interview transcripts were analyzed for themes. RESULTS: Twelve patients, five caregivers, and five prescribers were included in the schizophrenia and BP-I samples. For patients and caregivers, an ideal treatment was efficacious, administered less often than a once-monthly LAI, and had minimal or no side-effects. Important LAI features included staying on the same medication, choice of injection site, and dosing frequency. Patients and caregivers viewed a once-every-2-months LAI positively, due to fewer appointments and reduced injection impact, but noted concerns about its effectiveness and potential side-effects. When prescribing LAIs, prescribers considered patient- and treatment-related factors, access, and control. The potential for greater patient freedom and stability with a once-every-2-months LAI was noted, but a loss of dosing control was a concern. Several differences between schizophrenia and BP-I samples were identified, including the level of patient/caregiver involvement in treatment decisions and unique treatment goals. CONCLUSIONS: People living with schizophrenia or BP-I, caregivers, and prescribers in the United States and Canada generally had favorable views of LAIs administered once every 2 months. Quantitative follow-up research that extends these findings is warranted.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.375
GPT teacher head0.506
Teacher spread0.131 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Medical Research and OpinionSame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207