Pattern of antidepressant use and duration of depression-related absence from work
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the relationship between antidepressant prescription and receipt of depression-related disability benefits. AIMS: To address two questions: first, is prescription of antidepressants in accordance with published clinical guides associated with better disability outcomes, and second, what is the relationship between guideline-concordant antidepressant prescription and length of disability? METHOD: An observational study was conducted using administrative data from three major Canadian financial and insurance sector companies. Short-term disability and prescription drug claims records for 1996-1998 were linked for workers receiving depression-related short-term disability benefits during that time. RESULTS: Recommended first-line agents and recommended doses were significantly associated with return to work (chi(2)=6.64, P<0.036). In addition, among those who returned to work, early intervention was significantly associated with a shortened disability episode (beta=-24.1; 95% CI -34.4 to -13.8). CONCLUSIONS: Depression-related workplace disability is a problem for which there is no simple solution. These results provide an additional piece to the puzzle of helping workers disabled by depression to return to work.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".