Sertraline Treatment of Nonresponders to Extended Cognitive-Behavior Therapy in Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of sertraline (SRT) in children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) who did not respond to two consecutive courses of cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT). METHODS: Observational study with 11 participants (males, n=6), 7-17 years of age with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) primary OCD. All had received 14 plus 10 sessions of CBT over the course of 218-532 days (mean=342.2, SD=85.5). Outcome measures were mean reduction of the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS) total score and adequate clinical response (CY-BOCS<16). All participants received SRT (maximum dose 200 mg/day). The study was a part of the Nordic Long-Term OCD Treatment Study (NordLOTS). RESULTS: Participants were treated with SRT over 72-300 days (mean=164.2, SD=68.3). The mean CY-BOCS score was reduced from 21.5 (SD=2.6) to 17.5 (SD=3.3). Only three participants obtained adequate clinical response (27.2%), and only two obtained >25% CY-BOCS total score reduction (close to 50%). CONCLUSIONS: A clinical response in approximately one third of the participants suggests that SRT treatment might be beneficial to a minority of patients who have consistently failed CBT.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".