Review: Intravenous anti-obsessive agents: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oral antidepressants are currently the first-line pharmacotherapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but response rates can often be low and with delayed onset of therapeutic action. Some reports have suggested that intravenous (i.v.) anti-obsessive agents may have faster onset of action and greater efficacy. A Medline search was conducted for all reports pertaining to the use of i.v. antidepressants for OCD. Search terms included: 'intravenous', 'clomipramine', 'selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor', 'tricyclic', 'citalopram', 'sertraline', 'paroxetine', 'fluvoxamine', 'SSRIs' and 'intravenous antidepressants'. Relevant articles mainly investigated clomipramine (CMI) with one open trial examining citalopram. Intravenous agents appear to be well-tolerated, particularly in those who have failed oral agents, and may act more rapidly to produce initial clinical response, although this advantage is often lost over time. Preliminary evidence suggests subgroups of patients with severe treatment-refractory OCD may benefit from i.v. anti-obsessive agents, CMI and citalopram. Larger, controlled trials are needed for more definitive conclusions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".