Evidence for Use of Mood Stabilizers and Anticonvulsants in the Treatment of Nonaffective Disorders in Children and Adolescents
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mood stabilizers and anticonvulsants have been frequently used to control behaviors in children and adolescent with nonaffective disorders. The purpose of this study was to review the literature to evaluate the evidence of these agents as treatment options in this subset of patients. We reviewed all the literature between 1949 and 2009 on the use of anticonvulsants and mood stabilizers in controlling severe behavior dysregulation and aggression in child and adolescent who do not meet the criteria for any mood disorder. The review revealed a total of 19 studies. Of the different mood stabilizers/anticonvulsants, both lithium and divalproex showed some promise in treating children and adolescents with nonmood disorders. Larger studies are nevertheless needed to support the ongoing use of these current anticonvulsants and mood stabilizers in children and adolescents with nonmood disorders. Also, further investigation to the potential use in the long term would need to be established, bearing in mind the balance of side effects and treatment benefit.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it