Nefazodone in the Treatment of Generalized Social Phobia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have demonstrated the efficacy of serotonergic antidepres-sants, particularly the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), in the treatment of social phobia. We evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of nefazodone, a 5-HT(2) antagonist, in patients with generalized social phobia (GSP). METHOD: One hundred five patients with GSP (confirmed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV) from 4 Canadian outpatient anxiety clinics were assigned randomly to nefazodone (300-600 mg/day, flexible dose) or placebo for 14 weeks of double-blind treatment. Data were collected from October 12, 1999, through December 8, 2001. Primary efficacy outcomes were the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I) score and the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale score. RESULTS: In the intent-to-treat sample, 16 (31.4%) of 51 subjects taking nefazodone and 12 (23.5%) of 51 subjects taking placebo were rated as much or very much improved on the CGI-I at endpoint (chi(2) = 0.79, p = .38). With the exception of the Social Phobia Scale, no significant differences were found in measures of social phobia when comparing the nefazodone and placebo groups. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that nefazodone is not an effective agent in the treatment of GSP. These data parallel some recent findings with the use of the SSRI fluoxetine in GSP. The lack of efficacy of 2 serotonergic antidepressants in GSP suggests that serotonin reuptake inhibition may not be the only mechanism of action required for efficacy to occur in the treatment of GSP.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".