MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090821640 · doi:10.4088/jcp.20m13283

Coprescribed Benzodiazepines in Older Adults Receiving Antidepressants for Anxiety and Depressive Disorders

2020· article· en· W3090821640 on OpenAlexaff
Helene M. Altmann, Sarah T. Stahl, Marie Anne Gebara, Eric J. Lenze, Benoit H. Mulsant, Daniel M. Blumberger, Charles F. Reynolds, Jordan F. Karp

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsGeneralized anxiety disorderAnxietyMajor depressive disorderPsychiatryDropout (neural networks)Clinical trialAnxiety disorderMedicineClinical psychologyDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsPsychologyInternal medicineCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: There is a paucity of data on the effects of coprescribed benzodiazepines on treatment response variability and adherence to antidepressant pharmacotherapy for depression and anxiety in late life. The objective of this transdiagnostic analysis was to examine the effect of benzodiazepines on treatment outcomes in older patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) or major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Secondary analyses of data from 2 clinical trials of antidepressant pharmacotherapy for GAD (escitalopram vs placebo, 2006-2009) or MDD (open treatment with venlafaxine, 2009-2014) were conducted. Participants included 640 adults aged 60+ years with DSM-IV-defined GAD (n = 177) or MDD (n = 463). Benzodiazepine data were collected at baseline. Adherence and treatment response were assessed over 12 weeks. The analysis addressed whether coprescribed benzodiazepines are associated with treatment response, antidepressant medication adherence, dropout, final dose of antidepressant medication, and report of antidepressant-related adverse effects. RESULTS: Participants with GAD and coprescribed benzodiazepines were treated with a lower mean dosage of escitalopram and were less likely to complete the trial; there was no difference in adherence or treatment response. Participants with MDD and coprescribed benzodiazepines were less likely to tolerate a therapeutic dose of venlafaxine and reported more medication-related adverse effects; there was no difference in adherence, dropout, or treatment response. CONCLUSIONS: Coprescription of benzodiazepines was associated with increased dropout in older patients with GAD and more medication-related adverse effects in older patients with MDD. However, with the systematic clinical attention offered in a clinical trial, they do not impede treatment response. Clinicians should be aware that a coprescribed benzodiazepine may be a marker of a more challenging treatment course. Trial Registration: Data analyzed were from studies with ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers NCT00892047 and NCT00105586.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.346 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207