MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078946789 · doi:10.2147/ndt.s42745

Risperidone, quetiapine, and olanzapine adjunctive treatments in major depression with psychotic features: a comparative study

2013· article· en· W2078946789 on OpenAlexaff
Adel Gabriel

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuetiapineMedicineOlanzapineRisperidoneDepression (economics)PsychiatryAdjunctive treatmentSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Psychotic depressionPharmacologyPsychosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of novel antipsychotics in the treatment of psychotic depression. METHOD: Consecutive patients who were admitted (n = 51) with a confirmed diagnosis of major depression with psychotic features (delusions or hallucinations or both) participated in this open-label, naturalistic study. All patients were treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) (citalopram or venlafaxine extended release [XR]), and atypical antipsychotic agents were added, as tolerated, during the first week of initiating the citalopram or venlafaxine. There were patients (n = 16) who received risperidone, who received quetiapine (n = 20), and who received olanzapine (n = 15), as an adjunctive treatment to either citalopram or venlafaxine for at least 8 weeks. Outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impression-Severity subscale (CGI-S), as the primary outcome measure, as well as the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-21 item (HAM-D21) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS). Tolerance to treatments and weight changes were monitored over the period of the trial. RESULTS: All patients completed the trial with no drop outs. At 8 weeks, there was a statistically significant (P < 0.001) clinical improvement in all outcome measures for both the depressive and psychotic symptoms, for all three groups of atypical adjunctive treatments. Utilizing analysis of variance (ANOVA), there were no significant differences between the three adjunctive treatment groups in outcome measures. The three antipsychotic agents were equally tolerated. At 8 weeks there was slight increase in weight in the three treatment groups, which was statistically significant (P > .01) in the olanzapine group. CONCLUSION: Quetiapine, risperidone, and olanzapine, given as adjunctive treatment with SSRIS or SNRIs can significantly and equally improve depressive and psychotic symptoms, in the short-term treatment of major depression with psychotic features. The author recommends that large controlled trials be conducted to examine the differences in long-term efficacy and tolerance between the atypical antipsychotic agents, in the treatment of major depression with or without psychotic features.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuropsychiatric Disease and TreatmentSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207