MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Atypical antipsychotics and suicide in mood and anxiety disorders

2003· review· en· W2063421821 on OpenAlexaff
Verinder Sharma

Bibliographic record

VenueBipolar Disorders · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychiatryBipolar disorderOlanzapineAnxietyMood disordersMoodSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Major depressive disorderQuetiapineMedicinePsychologyClozapineClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, a million people commit suicide every year, and 10-20 million attempt it. Mood disorders, especially major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder, are the most common psychiatric conditions associated with suicide. Primary (psychiatric and physical illness), secondary (psychosocial), and tertiary (demographic) risk factors for suicide have been identified. Comorbid psychiatric illness, particularly anxiety symptoms or disorders, significantly increase the risk of suicidal behavior. Current standard risk assessments and precautions may be of limited value, while assessing the severity of anxiety and agitation may be more effective in identifying patients at risk. Lithium is the medication that has most consistently demonstrated an antisuicidal effect. The effects of antidepressants and conventional antipsychotics on suicide risk are uncertain, but atypical antipsychotics appear promising. Atypical antipsychotics have beneficial effects on depressed mood both in patients with MDD and in patients with bipolar disorder. In addition, data in patients with schizophrenia have demonstrated a significant improvement in the incidence of suicidal behavior with clozapine compared with olanzapine. Electroconvulsive therapy appears to have an acute benefit on suicidality.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBipolar DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207