Pharmacologic Response to Depressive Disorders Among Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to identify determinants of use of psychoactive medication and receipt of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) among adolescents with a diagnosis of new-onset depression. METHODS: A population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted among 447 adolescents enrolled in the Quebec drug plan who had new episodes of depression diagnosed between October 2000 and March 2001 by pediatricians, general practitioners, or psychiatrists. The main outcomes were use of psychoactive medication in the year after diagnosis and receipt of SSRIs at the first visit during which pharmacotherapy was prescribed. Receipt of SSRIs was assessed by the initial psychoactive dispensing claim following the diagnosis of depression. RESULTS: In the year after diagnosis, 258 adolescents (58 percent) received psychoactive medications, of whom 135 (52 percent) initially received SSRIs. Diagnosing pediatricians were the least likely to prescribe psychoactive medication. Patients of psychiatrists were less likely than those of primary care physicians to receive antidepressants for dysthymia or adjustment disorder accompanied by depressed mood (26 percent compared with 42 percent). Being female, having a diagnosing general practitioner or pediatrician, and having the same diagnosing and treating physician were associated with higher odds of receiving SSRIs. Being a welfare recipient and living in a rural area rather than an urban area were associated with lower odds. CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent males, those receiving welfare, and those living in rural areas were less likely to receive treatment that was recommended at the time of the study and thus may need special attention from mental health care providers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".