Paroxetine but not imipramine improved depression related outcomes in adolescents with <i>DSM-IV</i> major depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Keller MB, Ryan ND, Strober M , et al. Efficacy of paroxetine in the treatment of adolescent major depression: a randomized, controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry2001 Jul; 40 : 762 –72 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In adolescents with major depression, is paroxetine or imipramine more effective than placebo for improving depression related outcomes? Randomised (unclear allocation concealement*), blinded (patients, clinicians, outcome assessors and statisticians)*, placebo controlled trial with 8 weeks of follow up. 10 centres in the US and 2 in Canada. 275 adolescents (mean age 15 y, 62% girls) who were medically healthy with a current episode of DSM-IV major depression for ≥8 weeks. Additional inclusion criteria were a total score of ≥12 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), a score of <60 on the Children's Global Assessment Scale, and a score of ≥80 on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Exclusion criteria included a … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DJournal%2Bof%2Bthe%2BAmerican%2BAcademy%2Bof%2BChild%2Band%2BAdolescent%2BPsychiatry%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BAm%2BAcad%2BChild%2BAdolesc%2BPsychiatry%26rft.aulast%253DKeller%26rft.auinit1%253DM.%2BB.%26rft.volume%253D40%26rft.issue%253D7%26rft.spage%253D762%26rft.epage%253D772%26rft.atitle%253DEfficacy%2Bof%2Bparoxetine%2Bin%2Bthe%2Btreatment%2Bof%2Badolescent%2Bmajor%2Bdepression%253A%2Ba%2Brandomized%252C%2Bcontrolled%2Btrial.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1097%252F00004583-200107000-00010%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F11437014%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/00004583-200107000-00010&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=11437014&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmental%2F5%2F1%2F16.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000169483500010&link_type=ISI
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".