The Myth of Panic Spontaneity: Consideration of Behavioral and Neurochemical Sensitization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Panic disorder is characterized by a progression of panic symptom severity with repeated attacks.Repeated panic episodes evoke heightened anticipatory anxiety, phobic avoidance and are typically associated with comorbid symptoms of depression.Due to the heterogeneity of the disorder, reliable neurochemical correlates attending panic have not been identified.However, variable neuropeptide interfacing with major and minor transmitter systems may modulate individual vulnerability to panic and account for variable panic profiles.The extensive colocalization of cholecystokinin (CCK) with other neurotransmitters, including dopamine (DA), enkephalin (ENK) and GABA, in specific central sites may influence various aspects of anxiety and panic.The behavioral correlates attending panic likely follow from variable neurochemical release and conditioning/sensitization.Clinicians maintain that recurrent panic attacks are spontaneous (unexpected, uncued) and fail to acknowledge the wealth of information implicating a prominent role for stressful life events in panic.Conditioning and sensitization of both behavior (e.g., fear-motivated) and neurochemical events (e.g., DA and CCK) in response to uncontrollable stressors parallel the diverse heterogeneity of panic amongst clinical samples.Cholecystokinin-4, pentagastrin, lactate acid, and CO 2 induce panic attacks that are dependent on subjective history, expectancy measures and panic profiles.Panic disorder is associated with chronic illness and familial sick-role modeling exacerbates the course of the illness.The current review outlines the evidence in support of a conditioning/sensitization model for panic, a model that may explain the variable efficacies of pharmacological interventions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".