Explore the vast range of titles available.

A recent increase in the literature regarding the evidence base for clozapine has made it increasingly difficult for clinicians to judge “best evidence” for clozapine use. As such, we aimed at elucidating the state-of-the-art for clozapine with regard to efficacy, effectiveness, tolerability, and management of clozapine and clozapine-related adverse events in neuropsychiatric disorders. We conducted a systematic PRISMA-conforming quantitative meta-review of available meta-analytic evidence regarding clozapine use. Primary outcome effect sizes were extracted and transformed into relative risk ratios (RR) and standardized mean differences (SMD). The methodological quality of meta-analyses was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 checklist. Of the 112 meta-analyses included in our review, 61 (54.5%) had an overall high methodological quality according to AMSTAR-2. Clozapine appears to have superior effects on positive, negative, and overall symptoms and relapse rates in schizophrenia (treatment-resistant and non-treatment-resistant subpopulations) compared to first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs) and to pooled FGAs/second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). Despite an unfavorable metabolic and hematological adverse-event profile compared to other antipsychotics, hospitalization, mortality and all-cause discontinuation (ACD) rates of clozapine surprisingly show a pattern of superiority. Our meta-review outlines the superior overall efficacy of clozapine compared to FGAs and most other SGAs in schizophrenia and suggests beneficial efficacy outcomes in bipolar disorder and Parkinson’s disease psychosis (PDP). More clinical studies and subsequent meta-analyses are needed beyond the application of clozapine in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders and future studies should be directed into multidimensional clozapine side-effect management to foster evidence and to inform future guidelines.

There has been deepening concern about political polarization in public attitudes toward the scientific community. The \"intrinsic thesis\" attributes this polarization to psychological deficiencies among conservatives as compared to liberals. The \"contextual thesis\" makes no such claims about inherent psychological differences between conservatives and liberals, but rather points to interacting institutional and psychological factors as the forces driving polarization. We evaluate the evidence for both theses in the context of developing and testing a theoretical model of audience response to dissonant science communication. Conducting a national online experiment (N = 1,500), we examined audience reactions to both conservativedissonant and liberal-dissonant science messages and consequences for trust in the scientific community. Our results suggest liberals and conservatives alike react negatively to dissonant science communication, resulting in diminished trust of the scientific community. We discuss how our findings link to the larger debate about political polarization of science and implications for science communicators.

In the past decade, a new and promising literature has been established linking endogenous growth theory to knowledge spillovers and entrepreneurship theory: the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship (KSTE). This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of scholarly research on this fruitful and promising strand of the literature. It highlights the increasing importance and acceptance of KSTE in the scientific community worldwide, its emergence across different fields in economics, management and policy and also the issues and questions raised. Based on all articles on KSTE published in refereed journals in the past 15 years (1999-2013), we identify the key academic journals, the main issues and subjects addressed and the backward and forward citations. We also identify the authors and their connections in terms of coauthorships to reconstruct the scientific community debating on KSTE. We are confident that our work will benefit scholars intending to leverage KSTE in their research in that it summarizes the main academic conversations within this theoretical perspective and set the boundaries of the network of scholars developing it.