MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093654366 · doi:10.4088/jcp.0307e06

Preventing Recurrent Depression

2007· article· en· W2093654366 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Blier, Martín Keller, Mark H. Pollack, Michael E. Thase, John Zajecka, David L. Dünner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsMental Health Research Canada
FundersH. Lundbeck A/SNational Institute of Mental HealthSanofiNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionGlaxoSmithKlinePfizerAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsElectroconvulsive therapyPharmacotherapyPsychosocialDepression (economics)Psychological interventionMaintenance therapyPsychiatryStressorMedicineCognitive therapyCognitive behavioral therapyPsychologyIntensive care medicineCognitionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In contrast to continuation therapy, a treatment aimed at suppressing symptoms during a current depressive episode, maintenance therapy is designed to prevent the development of a new episode. Candidates for maintenance therapy include patients who have achieved remission and have had 2 or more lifetime episodes, especially if they have comorbid disorders, ongoing psychosocial stressors, poor symptom control, or severe depressive episodes. Maintenance pharmacotherapy data strongly support the use of antidepressants at the dosage that helped the patient achieve remission. Other maintenance treatment interventions include psychotherapy, especially cognitive-behavioral therapy, and in some extreme cases, electroconvulsive therapy. Maintenance therapy considerations for clinicians include assessing treatment guidelines, addressing nonadherent patients, and measuring medication treatment response.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.391 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations54
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207