Sertraline Effects in Adolescent Major Depression and Dysthymia: A Six-Month Open Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This 6-month open-label study evaluated the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of sertraline in 21 adolescent psychiatric outpatients, ages 12 to 18 years, diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD, n = 13) or dysthymic disorder (DD, n = 8). Both groups showed clinically significant improvements on the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Scale, and the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity (CGI-S). The MDD group showed maximal clinical response (based on the method of last observation carried forward) on the HAM-D and CGI at weeks 12 (76.9%) and 20 (76.9%), respectively. Response rates were maintained at week 24 with all six MDD study completers (100%) responding to treatment. The DD group achieved maximal response on the HAM-D (100%) and the CGI (75%) at week 6. Response rates in this group did not remain as elevated over time with two out of three (66.7%) DD study completers responding to treatment at week 24. Generally, sertraline was safe and well tolerated. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and resolved with no action taken. Results suggest that sertraline may be efficacious in acute and continuation treatment of MDD in adolescents. DD patients showed evidence of clinical response and improvement, particularly in the acute treatment phase. Incorporating a longer evaluation period in the study of antidepressant therapy for adolescents with MDD and/or DD is emphasized.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".