Psychological dependence on antidepressants in patients with panic disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No study has investigated psychological dependence on antidepressants in patients with panic disorder, which was addressed in this study. This study was carried out in four psychiatric clinics in Tokyo, Japan. Individuals were eligible if they were outpatients aged 18 years or older and fulfilled the diagnostic criteria for panic disorder (ICD-10). Assessments included the Japanese Versions of the Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS), the Self-Report Version of Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS-SR), and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report. Eighty-four individuals were included; of these, 30 patients (35.7%) showed psychological dependence on antidepressants (i.e. a total score of ≥5 in the SDS). A multiple regression analysis showed that PDSS scores and illness duration were correlated positively with SDS total scores. A binary regression model showed that absence of remission (i.e. a total score of ≥5 in the PDSS) and longer duration of illness increased the risk of dependence on antidepressants. Approximately one-third of the patients with panic disorder, receiving antidepressants, fulfilled the criteria for psychological dependence on these drugs. The results underscore the need for close monitoring, especially for those who present severe symptomatology or have a chronic course of the illness.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".