MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166845465 · doi:10.1136/bmj.h569

Adjunctive treatment with quetiapine for major depressive disorder: are the benefits of treatment worth the risks?

2015· review· en· W2166845465 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tamara Pringsheim, David M. Gardner, Scott B. Patten

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuetiapinePsychiatryDepressive symptomsMajor depressive disorderAdjunctive treatmentPsychologyQuetiapine FumarateMedicinePsychotherapistSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Internal medicineAtypical antipsychoticAntipsychoticMoodAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quetiapine was approved in 2009 and 2010 for the adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in several countries worldwide, including the European Union, Canada, the United States, and Australia. These approvals followed three industry sponsored trials of quetiapine versus placebo added to an antidepressant for depression in adults who had an inadequate response to at least six weeks of antidepressant treatment. All three trials showed statistically significant improvements in symptoms of depression compared with placebo.1 Pharmacoepidemiological studies in the United States and Canada have shown a shift in practice over the past decade in the use of antipsychotic drugs in the management of MDD. The US National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey found that the percentage of office visits in which a non-psychotic depression was diagnosed that included adjunctive antipsychotic treatment increased from 4.6% (95% confidence interval 2.9% to 6.3%) in 1999-2000 to 12.5% (9.7% to 15.3%) in 2009-10.2 Quetiapine was the most frequently used antipsychotic drug for augmentation from 2007 to 2010. US data have also shown declining rates of psychotherapy among antidepressant users as the percentage of patients receiving antipsychotic drugs has increased.3 Over the past decade, Canada has seen a large and preferential increase in the use of quetiapine, which has been the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic since 2007. In 2005, 3.2 prescriptions for quetiapine by family physicians were dispensed per 100 Canadians; by 2012 this had increased to 12.0 per 100.4 Mood disorders were the most common diagnoses associated with quetiapine prescriptions. With an estimated global point prevalence of 4.4%,5 MDD is a frequently encountered problem in clinical practice. Approximately 33% of people in the STAR*D sample (a prospective study of 3671 people with MDD) entered remission after initial selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment; this increased to 50% after a switch …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207