MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W124487897 · doi:10.1139/jpn.0341

Suicidality with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors: Valid claim?

2003· article· en· W124487897 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Y.D. Lapierre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluoxetinePsychiatryDepression (economics)Reuptake inhibitorSerotonin Uptake InhibitorsSerotonin reuptake inhibitorMedicinePsychologySerotoninAntidepressantInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The red flags raised by the 1990 clinical reports of increased suicidality associated with treatment with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) fluoxetine were followed by anecdotal reports of similar symptoms with other antidepressants of the same class. Recent discussions by Healy have argued in favour of a suicidogenic potential of the SSRIs. This paper reviews the relevant literature addressing the epidemiological data of Western populations and the data accumulated from clinical trial databases in several countries. The evidence currently available does not support the hypothesis that antidepressants or, more specifically, SSRIs cause increased suicidality in patients with depression, nor do they appear to do so in patients treated with these drugs for other reasons.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0100.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatry and NeuroscienceSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207