Association between psychomotor disturbance and treatment outcome in psychotic depression: a STOP-PD II report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Little is known about the relationship between psychomotor disturbance (PMD) and treatment outcome of psychotic depression. This study examined the association between PMD and subsequent remission and relapse of treated psychotic depression. Methods Two hundred and sixty-nine men and women aged 18–85 years with an episode of psychotic depression were treated with open-label sertraline plus olanzapine for up to 12 weeks. Participants who remained in remission or near-remission following an 8-week stabilization phase were eligible to participate in a 36-week randomized controlled trial (RCT) that compared the efficacy and tolerability of sertraline plus olanzapine (n = 64) with sertraline plus placebo (n = 62). PMD was measured with the psychiatrist-rated sign-based CORE at acute phase baseline and at RCT baseline. Spearman's correlations and logistic regression analyses were used to analyze the association between CORE total score at acute phase baseline and remission/near-remission and CORE total score at RCT baseline and relapse. Results Higher CORE total score at acute phase baseline was associated with lower frequency of remission/near-remission. Higher CORE total score at RCT baseline was associated with higher frequency of relapse, in the RCT sample as a whole, as well as in each of the two randomized groups. Conclusions PMD is associated with poorer outcome of psychotic depression treated with sertraline plus olanzapine. Future research needs to examine the neurobiology of PMD in psychotic depression in relation to treatment outcome.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".