MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021999429 · doi:10.2174/138945006775515464

Catecholaminergic Strategies for the Treatment of Major Depression

2006· review· en· W2021999429 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Tremblay, Pierre Blier

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Targets · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReboxetineBupropionDesipramineDopamineReuptakePharmacologyCatecholaminergicMedicineAntidepressantNorepinephrineMirtazapineReuptake inhibitorSerotoninInternal medicineReceptorHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have become the first line medications for the treatment of depression, drugs primarily targeting the norepinephrine (NE) and/or the dopamine catecholaminergic systems are also effective. These include selective NE reuptake inhibitors, such as desipramine and reboxetine, the NE releaser bupropion and the alpha2-adrenergic antagonists mianserin and mirtazapine. Dopamine type 2 agonists are also effective in treating depression, although they are rarely used. Since the NE, dopamine and serotonin systems have reciprocal interactions, it is virtually impossible to act on a specific neuronal element without affecting in a cascade effect the two other systems. In this review, the primary actions of the catecholaminergic strategies upon their acute and long-term administration are described, as well as their impact on other systems. Their use in treatment-resistant depressed patients is also addressed.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations68
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Drug TargetsSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207