Olanzapine use as an adjunctive treatment for hospitalized children with anorexia nervosa: Case reports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A recent case report suggested that olanzapine resulted in improved weight gain and maintenance, as well as decreased anxiety and agitation, for two hospitalized inpatients with anorexia nervosa (AN). However, a subsequent larger case study did not show a relationship between the use of olanzapine and rate of weight gain among a primarily adult population. The aim of this case report was to clinically examine the therapeutic benefit and tolerability of olanzapine as an adjunctive treatment for four children with AN in a pediatric inpatient setting. RESULTS: Olanzapine use was associated with considerable weight gain and maintenance, with an average rate of weight gain during hospitalization of 0.99 kg per week. In addition to weight gain, olanzapine was associated with a clinically notable decrease in levels of agitation and premeal anxiety and almost immediate improvement in sleep, general functioning, and overall compliance with treatment. Olanzapine was also well tolerated in these young patients. DISCUSSION: These case report findings warrant more controlled research, including randomized controlled studies, to better determine the therapeutic benefits and safety of olanzapine use in children with AN.
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 | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".