MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489007091 · doi:10.1111/bcp.12090

Prescription of antidepressants and the risk of road traffic crash in the elderly: a case–crossover study

2013· article· en· W1489007091 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ludivine Orriols, Machelle Wilchesky, Emmanuel Lagarde, Samy Suissa

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOlder Adults Driving Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCrashMedicineMedical prescriptionCrossover studyPoison controlAntidepressantDepression (economics)Injury preventionEmergency medicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPharmacologyAlternative medicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To investigate the impact of antidepressants on the risk of road traffic crash in the elderly. METHODS: Reports from the Universal Quebec Automobile Insurance Agency database were matched with data on antidepressant prescription from the Quebec Health Insurance Agency. The case-crossover analysis consisted in comparing exposure during a period immediately before the crash with exposure during earlier periods, for the same subject. RESULTS: One hundred and nine thousand four hundred and six drivers between 66 and 84 years of age involved in a traffic crash between 1988 and 2000 were included. Two thousand nine hundred and nineteen (2.7%) were exposed to an antidepressant on the day of the crash. Case-crossover analysis found an increased risk of crash in drivers with a prescription of antidepressants before their crash when compared with a prescription of antidepressants 4 to 8 months before the crash (OR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.08, 1.30 to 1.42. 95% CI 1.30, 1.55). With the most recent control periods, results were not significant. CONCLUSION: A patient's mental state is probably more similar between two periods that are close to each other than up to 8 months before. Consequently, the risk of crash is likely to be linked to symptoms of depression.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.407 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicOlder Adults Driving StudiesFrench-language works237,207