Weight gain during olanzapine treatment for psychotic depression: effects of dose and age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weight gain has often been associated with olanzapine treatment, yet little is known about the influence of patient age or cumulative dose on olanzapine-associated weight gain. The first 118 participants in the National Institutes of Mental Health Study of the Pharmacotherapy of Psychotic Depression randomized clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Registration NCT00056472) completing at least 4 weeks of treatment with olanzapine were analyzed to determine the relationship between weight gain, age, and cumulative olanzapine dose. Younger (age 18-59 years) and older (age 60+ years) participants received open-label olanzapine and either sertraline or placebo for up to 12 weeks. Linear mixed effect regression modeling was used to determine the effects of age and cumulative olanzapine dose on weight gain, controlling for potential confounders. Age was observed to have a significant negative association with weight gain (P=0.01), even after controlling for differences in cumulative dose and baseline body mass index. Each 10-year increase in age was associated with a decrease in mean weight gain over 12 weeks of approximately 0.6 kg (95% confidence interval: 0.14-1.05 kg). Cumulative olanzapine dose was also significantly associated with weight gain (P<0.0001). Approximately 60% of completers of the 12-week trial experienced clinically significant weight gain (> or =7% of baseline weight).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".