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
BACKGROUND: Trichotillomania (TTM) (hair-pulling disorder) is a prevalent and disabling disorder characterised by recurrent hair-pulling. The effect of medication on trichotillomania has not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of medication for trichotillomania in adults compared with placebo or other active agents. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group Register (to 31 July 2013), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years); EMBASE (1974 to date); MEDLINE (1950 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Two review authors identified relevant trials by assessing the abstracts of all possible studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of a medication versus placebo or active agent for TTM in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed the data extraction and 'Risk of bias' assessments, and disagreements were resolved through discussion with a third review author. Primary outcomes included the mean difference (MD) in reduction of trichotillomania symptoms on a continuous measure of trichotillomania symptom severity, and the risk ratio (RR) of the clinical response based on a dichotomous measure, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN RESULTS: We identified eight studies with a total of 204 participants and a mean sample size of 25. All trials were single-centre trials, and participants seen on an outpatient basis. Seven studies compared medication and placebo (n = 184); one study compared medication and another active agent (n = 13). Duration of the studies was six to twelve weeks. Meta-analysis was not undertaken because of the methodological heterogeneity of the trials. The studies did not employ intention-to-treat analyses and were at a high risk of attrition bias. Adverse events were not well-documented in the studies.None of the three studies of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) demonstrated strong evidence of a treatment effect on any of the outcomes of interest. The unpublished naltrexone study did not provide strong evidence of a treatment effect. Two studies, an olanzapine study and a N-acetylcysteine (NAC) study, reported statistically significant treatment effects. One study of clomipramine demonstrated a treatment effect on two out of three measures of response to treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No particular medication class definitively demonstrates efficacy in the treatment of trichotillomania. Preliminary evidence suggests treatment effects of clomipramine, NAC and olanzapine based on three individual trials, albeit with very small sample sizes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
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