Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17634413›Full record

ReviewSchizophrenia bulletin2008

Rethinking antipsychotic formulary policy.

R A Rosenheck, D L Leslie, Susan Busch, Ethan S Rofman, Michael Sernyak

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Schizophrenia bulletin, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. A conditional model of evidence-based decision making.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2009
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

R A RosenheckYale Medical School, New Haven, CT, USA. Robert.Rosenheck@Yale.Edu
D L Leslie
Susan Busch
Ethan S Rofman
Michael Sernyak
Yale University · USBoston University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this commentary, we review recent research suggesting that (a) second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) may be no more effective than first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs), (b) the reduced risk of EPS and tardive dyskinesia with SGAs is more weakly supported by the research literature than has been appreciated, and (c) benefits may be offset by greater metabolic risks of some SGAs and their substantially greater cost. Bearing in mind, as well, that risperidone, currently the least expensive SGA, will soon be available as an even less expensive generic drug, we propose a new algorithm for maintenance antipsychotic therapy. We further outline a cautious implementation procedure that relies on standardized documentation and feedback, without a restrictive formulary that would limit physician choice. The algorithm outlined here and the process for its implementation are intended as a stimulus for discussion of potential policy responses, not as a finalized proposition.

Indexed as

Health PolicyPublic PolicyAntipsychotic AgentsChemistry, PharmaceuticalHumansMental Health ServicesSchizophreniaAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

PMID17634413
PMCPMC2632408
OpenAlexW2119738055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.