The effectiveness of ketamine on anxiety, irritability, and agitation: Implications for treating mixed features in adults with major depressive or bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To determine the effectiveness of intravenous (IV) ketamine on anxiety, irritability, agitation, and suicidality, in adults with treatment‐resistant major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD). Method Adults (N = 201) with treatment‐resistant MDD or BD received repeat‐dose IV ketamine treatment at a community‐based clinic. Mixed features were measured using symptoms of anxiety, irritability, and agitation (AIA), as measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder‐7 (GAD‐7) scale. The Quick Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology Self‐Report‐16 (QIDS‐SR 16 ) was used to measure overall treatment response, and the QIDS‐SR 16 suicidal ideation (SI) item was used to measure change in SI symptoms with ketamine treatment. The anxiety, irritability, and agitation items on the GAD‐7 were used to assess effectiveness of IV ketamine in treating symptoms of mixed features. Results In this retrospective analysis, 113 participants met AIA criteria. Participants with AIA experienced a significantly greater reduction in overall depressive symptoms ( F (1, 558) = 9.49, P = .002), SI ( F (1, 558) = 3.103, P = .079), anxiety ( F (1, 198) = 5.52, P = .007), irritability ( F (1, 198) = 28.35, P < .001), and agitation as measured by “trouble relaxing” ( F (1, 198) = 6.70, P = .010) from baseline compared to the non‐AIA group, regardless of number of treatments received. Conclusions Our preliminary results suggest that IV ketamine is effective in rapidly treating AIA and SI in adults with treatment‐resistant mood disorders. This observation suggests that IV ketamine could be considered a treatment alternative for adults with MDD or BD presenting with mixed features.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".