MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025562320 · doi:10.4088/jcp.09m05114gre

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Olanzapine in the Treatment of Trichotillomania

2010· article· en· W2025562320 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Van Ameringen, Catherine Mancini, Beth Patterson, Mark Bennett, Jonathan M. Oakman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOlanzapinePlaceboPsychologyRandomized controlled trialAdverse effectPsychiatryTicsInternal medicineMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Article AbstractBackground: Trichotillomania has been considered as part of the obsessive-compulsive disorder spectrum; however, trichotillomania treatment with obsessive-compulsive disorder medications has largely been unsuccessful. Objective: To determine whether a dopaminergic treatment as used in tics and Tourette's syndrome would be effective in trichotillomania. Method: Twenty-five participants with DSM-IV trichotillomania participated in a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of flexible-dose olanzapine for trichotillomania. Recruitment occurred between August 2001 and December 2005, and follow-up was completed in February 2006. The primary outcome measure was the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale, and secondary measures of efficacy included the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale for Trichotillomania (TTM-YBOCS) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) scale. Results: Eleven of 13 participants (85%) in the olanzapine group and 2 of 12 (17%) in the placebo group were considered responders according to the CGI-I (P†‰=†‰.001). There was a significant change from baseline to end point in the TTM-YBOCS (P†‰<†‰.01) and the CGI-S (P†‰<†‰.001). The mean†‰±†‰SD dose of olanzapine at end point was 10.8†‰±†‰5.7 mg/d. Twenty-one of 25 patients (84%) reported at least 1 adverse event, but no adverse events resulted in early withdrawal from the study. Conclusion: Olanzapine seems to be a safe and effective treatment for primary DSM-IV trichotillomania. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00182507J Clin PsychiatrySubmitted: February 9, 2009; accepted May 15, 2009. Online ahead of print: April 20, 2010 (doi:10.4088/JCP.09m05114gre). Corresponding author: Michael Van Ameringen, MD, Anxiety Disorders Clinic, 1F Clinic, McMaster University Medical Centre, Hamilton Health Sciences, Box 2000, Hamilton, Ontario, L8N 3Z5, Canada (vanamer@mcmaster.ca).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.411
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations148
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207