Stopping Antidepressants and Anxiolytics as Major Concerns Reported in Online Health Communities: A Text Mining Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Internet is a particularly dynamic way to quickly capture the perceptions of a population in real time. Complementary to traditional face-to-face communication, online social networks help patients to improve self-esteem and self-help. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to use text mining on material from an online forum exploring patients' concerns about treatment (antidepressants and anxiolytics). METHODS: Concerns about treatment were collected from discussion titles in patients' online community related to antidepressants and anxiolytics. To examine the content of these titles automatically, we used text mining methods, such as word frequency in a document-term matrix and co-occurrence of words using a network analysis. It was thus possible to identify topics discussed on the forum. RESULTS: The forum included 2415 discussions on antidepressants and anxiolytics over a period of 3 years. After a preprocessing step, the text mining algorithm identified the 99 most frequently occurring words in titles, among which were escitalopram, withdrawal, antidepressant, venlafaxine, paroxetine, and effect. Patients' concerns were related to antidepressant withdrawal, the need to share experience about symptoms, effects, and questions on weight gain with some drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' expression on the Internet is a potential additional resource in addressing patients' concerns about treatment. Patient profiles are close to that of patients treated in psychiatry.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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".