Benzodiazepine use associated with co-morbid post-traumatic stress syndrome and depression in older adults seeking services in general medical settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Benzodiazepines (BZD) should be limited in older adults. This study aimed to determine the association between BZD use and the presence of a probable post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSS) and whether this association is dependent on gender and co-morbid physical and mental conditions. METHODS: Data were retained from the Étude sur la Santé des Aînés (ESA) - Services study (2011-2013) and included 1,453 older adults (≥65 years) who completed a face to face at-home interview, who were covered under Quebec's public drug insurance plan, and had given permission to access their Régie de l'Assurance Maladie du Québec (RAMQ) medical and pharmaceutical services data. The presence of a PTSS was measured using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). The use of BZD and antidepressants in the year prior to interview was ascertained from data reported in the RAMQ drug registry. The presence of depression and an anxiety disorder was assessed with the ESA-Questionnaire which was based on DSM-5 criteria. The interaction between PTSS and gender, depression, anxiety, and multi-morbidity was also assessed. RESULTS: The prevalence of PTSS and BZD use reached 4.5% and 31.2%. Participants with PTSS were 1.9 (95% CI = 1.1-3.2) times more likely to use BZD. The presence of depression had a negative impact on the association between BZD use and PTSS (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: The use of BZD in older adults with PTSS is still prevalent today. Differences in benzodiazepine prescribing practices for more complex co-morbid psychiatric cases needs to be further studied.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".