Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36277256›Full record

ReviewSchizophrenia bulletin open2022

Chronic Use of Antipsychotics in Schizophrenia: Are We Asking the Right Question?

Jose M Rubio, Mercedes Perez-Rodriguez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Schizophrenia bulletin open, 2022. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  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

2 authors.

Jose M RubioDonald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Nortwhell, Hempstead, NY, USA.
Mercedes Perez-RodriguezDepartment of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Striatal Function in Psychosis RelapseK23MH127300 · NIMH · FEINSTEIN INSTITUTE FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH · PI RUBIO, JOSE M · 2021 to 2024
$689k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH127300
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is an ongoing debate about the potential risks and benefits of long-term antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia. The data for and against the chronic use of these medicines is mostly indirect, either from observational studies potentially exposed to reverse causation bias or randomized controlled studies that do not cover beyond 2-3 years. We propose that perseverating on the question of what positive or negative outcomes are causally associated with chronic antipsychotic treatment may not lead to better answers than the limited ones that we have, given the limited feasibility of more conclusive studies. Rather, we argue that addressing the research question of the risks and benefits of antipsychotic discontinuation from a perspective of personalized medicine, can be more productive and meaningful to people living with schizophrenia. To this end, research that can quantify the risk of relapse after treatment continuation for a given individual should be prioritized. We make the case that clinically feasible neuroimaging biomarkers have demonstrated promise in related paradigms, and that could be offering a way past this long debate on the risks and benefits of chronic antipsychotic use.

Indexed as

antipsychoticrelapsetreatment discontinuation

Identifiers

PMID36277256
PMCPMC9577501

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.