MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1531562561

Antidepressants as analgesics: a review of randomized controlled trials.

2001· review· en· W1531562561 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenlafaxineNefazodoneAnalgesicTrazodoneRandomized controlled trialTricyclicFluoxetineMedicineAntidepressantReuptake inhibitorPlaceboPharmacologyAnesthesiaPsychiatrySerotoninInternal medicineAnxietyAlternative medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review provides an overview of 59 randomized placebo-controlled trials that examined the analgesic effect of antidepressants. To summarize, there is significant evidence that the tricyclic group of antidepressants is analgesic and that trazodone is not; the data regarding selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are conflicting. To date, there are no randomized controlled trials examining the potential analgesic action of nefazodone or venlafaxine, but on the basis of initial clinical reports and its structural similarity to other analgesics, venlafaxine shows promise as an analgesic.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0460.009
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations243
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207