MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987019231 · doi:10.1517/14656566.2014.972936

Pharmacotherapy of trichotillomania (hair pulling disorder): an updated systematic review

2014· review· en· W1987019231 on OpenAlex
Rachel Rothbart, Dan J. Stein

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaTRIUMF
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsPharmacotherapyOlanzapineMedicinePsychiatrySertralineBody dysmorphic disorderPsychotherapistSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychologyAnxietyAntidepressant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Individuals affected by trichotillomania (TTM) (hair-pulling disorder) consciously or non-consciously pull out their own body hair. The disorder has recently been incorporated into a chapter entitled, 'Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders' in the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, fifth edition. AREAS COVERED: The review describes the literature currently available on the pharmacotherapy for TTM, including both randomized controlled trials and open-label trials of pharmacotherapy for TTM in adults or children. EXPERT OPINION: Early work focused on the serotonin reuptake inhibitors; however, the majority of the trials have been negative. There is a small body of evidence focused on pharmacotherapy for TTM. In future, larger trials are required to expand on the preliminary evidence available for N-acetylcysteine, olanzapine and dronabinol in recent trials.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.396 · 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