ReviewJournal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN2014
Antipsychotic dosing: found in translation.
Review in Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Guidelines for the Pharmacotherapy of Schizophrenia in Adults.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2017Pooled it
- Atypical antipsychotics for disruptive behaviour disorders in children and youths.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Successful management of clozapine adverse effects with extended (alternate day) antipsychotic dosing in a patient with schizophrenia.Journal of psychiatry & neuroscience : JPN · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the field of schizophrenia research, as in other areas of psychiatry, there is a sense of frustration that greater advances have not been made over the years, calling into question existing research strategies. Arguably, many purported gains claimed by research have been "lost in translation," resulting in limited impact on diagnosis and treatment in the clinical setting. There are exceptions; for example, we would argue that different lines of preclinical and clinical research have substantially altered how we look at antipsychotic dosing. While this story remains a work in progress, advances "found in translation" have played an important role. Detailing these changes, the present paper speaks to a body of evidence that has already shifted clinical practice and raises questions that may further alter the manner in which antipsychotics have been administered over the last 6 decades.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.