Anxiety symptoms in working patients with major depressive disorder treated with vortioxetine: associations with clinical and treatment outcomes in the AtWoRC study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anxiety symptoms are common in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and usually confer worse treatment outcomes. The long-term, open-label AtWoRC study in working patients with MDD treated with vortioxetine demonstrated a significant correlation between severity of anxiety symptoms and impaired work productivity. This analysis was undertaken to further explore clinical characteristics and treatment outcomes in patients with different levels of severity of anxiety symptoms at baseline. METHODS: = 116]. Associations were examined between GAD-7 and other outcome assessment scores at baseline. Observed mean changes from baseline to week 52 were compared between groups. RESULTS: Patients with severe anxiety had significantly worse depressive and cognitive symptoms, functioning, and work productivity at baseline than those with mild/moderate anxiety, but similar cognitive performance. Statistically significant improvements from baseline were seen for all outcomes after 52 weeks of vortioxetine treatment, with no significant differences observed between the two groups after adjustment for baseline anxiety scores. CONCLUSION: Treatment with vortioxetine was associated with long-term improvement in clinical symptoms and measures of work productivity in patients with MDD in a real-world setting, irrespective of severity of anxiety symptoms at the start of treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".