MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tratamento de idosos com depressão utilizando tricíclicos, IMAO, ISRS e outros antidepressivos

2002· article· pt· W1978810483 on OpenAlexaff
Mônica Zavaloni Scalco

Bibliographic record

VenueBrazilian Journal of Psychiatry · 2002
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antidepressivos são eficazes no tratamento da depressão em idosos. O sucesso do tratamento depende do tipo e da gravidade da depressão; das comorbidades com outras doenças psiquiátricas ou clínicas; da escolha adequada de antidepressivos, de sua eficácia e perfil de efeitos adversos; da orientação do paciente e de sua aderência ao tratamento. O manejo dos efeitos adversos em pacientes idosos, que usam muito mais medicações e apresentam mais doenças, é o ponto forte na escolha de antidepressivos. Em geral, os inibidores seletivos da recaptação de serotonina têm sido preferidos por apresentar menos riscos de complicações por efeitos adversos. Porém, diferentes antidepressivos podem ser preferíveis para diferentes pacientes. É indispensável que o médico conheça o paciente que irá tratar e o perfil de efeitos adversos e de possíveis interações medicamentosas dos antidepressivos para poder escolher o mais adequado para cada paciente. Neste artigo, são abordados os diferentes grupos de antidepressivos no tratamento agudo da depressão em idosos e o tratamento em populações especiais de idosos (idosos debilitados e idosos com demência).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrazilian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207