Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29922062›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2018

Identifying patients and clinical scenarios for use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics - expert consensus survey part 1.

Martha Sajatovic, Ruth Ross, Susan N Legacy, Christoph U Correll, John M Kane, Faith DiBiasi, Heather Fitzgerald, Matthew Byerly

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Martha SajatovicDepartment of Psychiatry, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Ruth RossRoss Editorial, Port Townsend, WA, USA.
Susan N LegacyUS Medical Affairs Neuroscience, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ, USA.
Christoph U CorrellPsychiatry, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Glen Oaks, NY, USA.
John M KanePsychiatry, The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Glen Oaks, NY, USA.
Faith DiBiasiScientific Communications, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc., Rockville, MD, USA.
Heather FitzgeraldMedical Affairs, Lundbeck LLC, Deerfield, IL, USA.
Matthew ByerlyCell Biology and Neuroscience, Center for Mental Health Research and Recovery, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA.
Donald & Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell · USDeerfield (United States) · USJefferson Healthcare · USMontana State University · USOtsuka (United States) · USPharmaceutical Product Development (United States) · USUniversity Hospitals of Cleveland · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess expert consensus on barriers and facilitators for long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) use and provide clinical recommendations on issues where clinical evidence is lacking, including identifying appropriate clinical situations for LAI use.

methodsA 50-question survey comprising 916 response options was distributed to 42 research experts and high prescribers with extensive LAI experience. Respondents rated options on relative appropriateness/importance using a 9-point scale. Consensus was determined using chi-square test of score distributions. Mean (standard deviation) ratings were calculated. Responses to 29 questions (577 options) relating to appropriate patients and clinical scenarios for LAI use are reported.

resultsRecommendations aligned with research on risk factors for nonadherence and poor outcomes for patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective or bipolar disorder. Findings suggested, contrary to general practice patterns, that LAI use may be appropriate earlier in the disease course and in younger patients. Results for bipolar disorder were similar to those for schizophrenia but with less consensus. Numerous facilitators of LAI prescribing were considered important, particularly that LAIs may reduce relapses and improve outcomes.

conclusionFindings support wider use of LAIs in patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective and bipolar disorders beyond the setting of poor adherence and earlier use in the disease course.

Indexed as

bipolar disorderexpert consensuslong-acting injectable antipsychoticsschizoaffective disorderschizophrenia

Identifiers

PMID29922062
PMCPMC5997124
OpenAlexW2807486965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.