Characteristics of Responders and Nonresponders to Brief-Pulse Right Unilateral ECT in a Controlled Clinical Trial
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
In a double-blind, randomized controlled study of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in patients with major depression, 7 of the 17 patients allocated to the right unilateral group failed to respond to treatment. The nonresponders were subsequently openly treated with bitemporal treatment, which produced an acceptable outcome in these cases of right unilateral treatment failure. This paper describes the clinical outcome, electrophysiological characteristics (impedence, estimated seizure threshold, and change in threshold), and the degree to which stimuli exceeded threshold in the responder and nonresponder groups. Responders had lower seizure thresholds and longer seizures than nonresponders. In comparison with nonresponders, responders showed trends toward greater impedance and treatment at a somewhat greater degree above threshold during the first few treatments. Threshold change with treatment was found not to be related to clinical outcome. Early identification of patients likely to respond to low-dose right unilateral ECT, together with the avoidance of benzodiazepine prescription during ECT, may permit many patients to receive low-dose right unilateral ECT successfully and with a minimum of cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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