MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072357163 · doi:10.1002/hup.648

Gender differences in clinical presentation and response to sertraline treatment of generalized anxiety disorder

2004· article· en· W2072357163 on OpenAlexaff
Meir Steiner, Christer Allgulander, Arun Ravindran, Hana Kosar, Tal Burt, Carol D. Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Psychopharmacology Clinical and Experimental · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph's Hospital
FundersPfizer
KeywordsSertralinePlaceboClinical Global ImpressionPsychologyAnxietyInternal medicineDepression (economics)Generalized anxiety disorderMedicinePsychiatryAntidepressant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate gender differences in the clinical presentation of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and response to sertraline treatment. METHODS: Adult outpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for GAD with a minimum Hamilton rating scale for anxiety (HAM-A) total score>or=18 were randomized to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with flexible doses (50-150 mg) of sertraline (n=182; female, 59%) or placebo (n=188; female, 51%). RESULTS: Clinical presentation of GAD was very similar in men and women in terms of the severity of the HAM-A psychic factor, severity of concomitant depression symptoms, duration of GAD, quality of life and impairment in physical health. Women had an earlier age of onset and higher HAM-A somatic factor scores compared with men. For both men and women, treatment with sertraline resulted in greater change from baseline to endpoint on the HAM-A compared with placebo (adjusted change+/-SE: men:-12.1+/-0.9 vs -8.8+/-0.9; women: -11.4+/-0.8 vs -7.1+/-0.9, p<0.001); the interaction between gender and treatment group was not significant, nor was there a significant difference between the average change from baseline for men compared with women. Similarly, responder rates based upon clinical global impression-improvement (CGI-I) scores at endpoint showed no significant interaction between gender and treatment, nor was there a significant difference in the response rates by gender; however, the response rate of sertraline compared with placebo was significantly different (p<0.0001) (men: 64% vs 40%; women: 62% vs 34%). Similar findings were evident at week 4 assessment and for completers (week 12). Overall, sertraline was well tolerated by both men and women. DISCUSSION: Women and men with GAD showed similar clinical presentations, with the exception that women had an earlier age of onset and reported more somatic anxiety symptoms. Sertraline was an effective and well tolerated treatment for GAD in both men and women.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.369 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations57
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Psychopharmacology Clinical and ExperimentalSame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207