Comparison of Sertraline, Venlafaxine and Desipramine Effects on Depression, Cognition and the Daily Living Activities in Alzheimer Patients
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
RATIONALE: The effects of antidepressants on mood, cognition and the daily activities of Alzheimer patients are ambiguous. The effects of antidepressants SSRIs (serotonin specific reuptake inhibitors), TCAs (tricyclic antidepressants) and SNRIs (serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors), in particular, are unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the effects of sertraline, venlafaxine and desipramine on depression, cognition and the daily activities of Alzheimer patients. METHODS: This randomized double-blind trial was approved by the Research and Ethics Committees of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences. 59 moderate Alzheimer patients with major depressive disorder were randomly divided into 3 groups (sertraline, venlafaxine and desipramine), treated for 12 weeks (150 mg maximum dose) and assessed by the Hamilton Depression Test (HRSD), the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) and the Barthel index at the week 0 and the 2(nd), 4(th), 8(th), 12(th) weeks thereafter. Data were analyzed by SPSS software, using ANOVA and paired t-tests. RESULTS: In the sertraline group, the results of all 3 tests, HRSD, MMSE and Barthel, in the 12(th) week showed significant improvements in comparison to the baseline (P<0.05 in all 3 tests). In the venlafaxine group, the results of MMSE and Barthel revealed significant improvements (P<0.05 in both tests). In the desipramine group, there was a significant improvement only in the Barthel test at the 12(th) week (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: In this trial, sertraline treatment was associated with superior effectiveness in relation to depressive, cognitive, and behavioral symptoms.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it