MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2107466676 · doi:10.1177/070674370505000307

Experimental Affective Symptoms in Panic Disorder Patients

2005· article· en· W2107466676 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thea Overbeek, Koen Schruers, Ine Docters van Leeuwen, Tineke Klaassen, Eric Griez

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanic disorderPanicPsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyAnxiety disorderMedicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To date, carbon dioxide (CO2) challenge tests in panic disorder (PD) patients have focused on anxiety as the sole outcome measure. This study assesses a broader range of symptoms in patients with PD. METHOD: We administered a gas mixture of 35% CO2 and 65% oxygen (O2) to 25 patients with PD. Nine patients met the criteria for a comorbid major depressive disorder (MDD), and 16 did not. We assessed not only subjects' symptoms of anxiety but also their symptoms of depression and aggression. RESULTS: Baseline ratings did not differ across the 2 subgroups. Postchallenge ratings were higher for PD and MDD patients on all the assessed affective symptoms, except for specific panic symptoms. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that, in addition to anxiety, CO2 challenge induces depressive and aggressive symptoms, specifically in PD patients with comorbid depression.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry→Same topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes→French-language works237,207→