Stabilization treatment of remitted psychotic depression: the STOP‐PD study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We conducted a 12-week double-blind study of stabilization pharmacotherapy in patients with remitted psychotic depression (PD). METHODS: Seventy-one persons aged 18 years or older who had achieved remission of PD when randomized to either olanzapine plus sertraline or olanzapine plus placebo were continued on the double-blind treatment associated with remission. Symptoms of depression and psychosis, and weight, were measured once every 4 weeks. Cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose were measured at stabilization phase baseline and Week 12/termination. RESULTS: The effect of treatment did not significantly change with time for depression, weight, or metabolic measures in the stabilization phase. Eight of the 71 participants (11.3%; 95% CI: 5.8, 20.7) experienced a relapse of major depression, psychosis, or both. Treatment groups did not differ in the frequency of relapse. In the entire study group, the adjusted estimate for change in weight was an increase of 1.66 kg (95% CI: 0.83, 2.48) and the adjusted estimate for change in total cholesterol was a decrease of 14.8 mg/dL (95% CI: 3.5, 26.1) during the 12-week stabilization phase; the remaining metabolic measures did not significantly change. CONCLUSION: Continuation of acute treatment was associated with stability of remission.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".