Off-label use of atomoxetine in adults: is it safe?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atomoxetine has been approved for the treatment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in both adults and children. However, it is also being examined for several off-label uses in adults including mood disorders, eating disorders, cognitive dysfunction, and the treatment of addictions. Prior to such use it is important to examine the reported adverse events to see if this represents an appropriate level of risk. This is particularly important in the light of recent warnings from several regulatory bodies about an increase in blood pressure in a significant percentage of patients taking atomoxetine. To understand the risks a literature review was performed, and which identified the following potential problems. The first is that this drug should not be given in patients with known cardiovascular problems, and that all adult patients who receive atomoxetine should be monitored for changes in blood pressure throughout treatment. Secondly, there are several clinical situations in which atomoxetine should be closely monitored, or avoided, including patients who have a history or risk of narrow angle glaucoma, epileptic seizures, Tourette's syndrome, a history of urinary outflow obstruction, or who are pregnant or lactating. In conclusion, the current literature suggests that atomoxetine can be safely used off-label provided the above precautions are taken.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".