Introduction to the Special Issue on: Benzodiazepine Side-Effects: From the Bench to the Clinic
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
This article introduces a special issue of Current Pharmaceutical Design focusing on the various side effects of benzodiazepine medications. We argue that an increased awareness of the risk of dependence, withdrawal symptoms upon discontinuation, and cognitive side effects of the benzodiazepines has likely contributed to the decline in their prescription rate over the last two decades, as has increased availability of alternative pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatments for anxiety and insomnia. The present special issue consists of series of five papers covering current issues in the area of benzodiazepine side effects. These reviews cover a wide range of topics pertaining to adverse, unintended consequences of this class of pharmacologic agents including their potential for tolerance and withdrawal, their profile of associated cognitive impairments, as well as current understanding of means for minimizing these unintended effects. The reviews also cover a variety of methodologies and disciplines from laboratory-based research findings with animals, to laboratory-based studies with healthy human volunteers, to findings obtained in the clinic with anxious patients. All reviews are timely contributions, covering highly relevant topics for consideration of benzodiazepine side effects at present. The papers presented herein should serve to stimulate future research that may ultimately help improve the quality of life of those patients living with debilitating anxiety-related conditions.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.039 |
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