Skip to search boxSkip to navigationSkip to main content

Defining "good" and "poor" outcomes in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: A multidimensional data-driven approach

  • Ilya A. Lipkovich(corresponding author)
    ,
  • Walter Deberdt
    ,
  • John G. Csernansky
    ,
  • Peter Buckley
    ,
  • Joseph Peuskens
    ,
  • Sara Kollack-Walker
*Corresponding author for this work
  • Eli Lilly
    ,
  • Washington University St. Louis
    ,
  • Northwestern University
    ,
  • ,
  • KU Leuven
Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Open access

Sustainable Development Goals

  • SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well

Abstract

The study's goal was to characterize the typology of patient outcomes based on social and occupational functioning and psychiatric symptoms following antipsychotic drug treatment, and to explore predictors of group membership representing the best/worst outcomes. A hierarchical cluster analysis was used to define groups of patients (n = 1449) based on endpoint values for psychiatric symptoms, social functioning, and useful work measured up to 30 weeks of treatment. Stepwise logistic regression was used to construct predictive models of cluster membership for baseline predictors, and with 2/4/8 weeks of treatment. Five distinct clusters of patients were identified at endpoint (Clusters A-E). Patients in Cluster A (25.6%, best outcome) had minimal psychiatric symptoms and mild functional impairment, while patients in Cluster D (14.3%) and E (14.8%) (worst outcome) had moderate-to-severe symptoms and severe functional impairment. Occupational functioning, disorganized thinking, and positive symptoms were sufficient to describe the clusters. Membership in the best/worst clusters was predicted by baseline scores for functioning and symptom severity, and by early changes in symptoms with treatment. Psychiatric symptoms and functioning provided complementary information to describe treatment outcomes. Early symptom response significantly improved the prediction of outcome, suggesting that early monitoring of treatment response may be useful in clinical practice.

Publication Information

Output type

Scholary Output:
Contribution to journal
Article
Peer-review

Original language

English (US)

Pages from-to (Number of pages)

Pages 161-167 (7 pages)

Journal (Volume, Issue Number)

Psychiatry Research (Volume 170, Issue 2-3)

Publication milestones

  • Published - 12/30/2009

Publication status

Published - 12/30/2009

ISSN

0165-1781

Publication IDs

  • Scopus: 70449524675
  • PubMed: 19897252

Publication metrics

Metrics

SciVal
citations
28
SciVal
FWCI
0.72
SciVal
Author count
8
SciVal
Paper percentile
81
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
0.13
Fractional count
7
Fractional count
0.88
Fractional count
1
Fractional count
1
Scopus
citations

PlumX, opens in new tab

Citation count
29
Social media
50
Captures
50

Funding Details

Several authors (Lipkovich, Deberdt, Kollack-Walker, Rotelli, Houston) are employees of Eli Lilly and Company, and this project was supported by Eli Lilly. The remaining 3 authors (Csernansky, Buckley and Peuskens) are external to the company; they currently serve as consultants for Eli Lilly and have previously received consultant fees. Authors would like to thank Heather Fox for editorial assistance.