Electroconvulsive Therapy in Older Adults: 13-Year Trends
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
OBJECTIVES: To examine temporal trends in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) use among all 12 million Ontario residents between January 1992 and December 2004 and to examine the differential trends in older adults, compared with younger ones. METHODS: We undertook a time-series analysis to examine annual trends in the use and prevalence of ECT, using linked provincial datasets. Descriptive data were presented for the population as a whole, and then trends were described separately by age groups (younger and older). As a comparator, we similarly examined antidepressant prevalence for older adults over the same time period. RESULTS: Overall rates of ECT prevalence were stable. Annual population rates of individuals receiving ECT increased by about 27%, from 12.3 per 100 000 population in 1992 to 15.6 per 100 000 in 1997, and then decreased to 12.5 per 100 000 by 2004. The population rates of ECT were about threefold higher among older adults, relative to the younger population. Antidepressant prevalence increased by 90.1% among older adults over the same time period. The female-to-male ratio was relatively stable over time. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of ECT has been relatively stable since the early 1990s. Older adults were much more likely to be prescribed a course of ECT than younger adults. ECT remains a commonly prescribed treatment, particularly in old age.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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