MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199343142 · doi:10.1097/cxa.0000000000000125

Theory and Practice of Treatment of Concurrent Major Depressive and Alcohol Use Disorders: 7 Lessons from Clinical Practice and Research

2021· article· en· W3199343142 on OpenAlex
Andriy V. Samokhvalov

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHomewood Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Alcohol use disorderClinical PracticeMedicinePsychiatryDepression (economics)Major depressive disorderPopulationQuality of life (healthcare)MoodClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychotherapistAlcoholFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives: Both major depression and alcohol use are highly prevalent in the Canadian population. They are the major contributors to disability and decreased quality of life and, as they are often comorbid with each other, the diagnosis and treatment of concurrent depression and alcohol use disorder represent a challenging task with multiple clinical questions requiring evidence-based recommendations. Thus, the goal of this article is to review the optimal strategies to treat concurrent alcohol use and major depressive disorders in the context of current research findings and clinical practice. Methods: Narrative review, knowledge synthesis, and secondary data analysis. Results: Based on the review of the relevant literature and secondary data analyses of our own clinical data, we devised a set of pragmatic clinical recommendations and guidance on differential diagnosis between alcohol-induced mood disorder and independent major depressive disorder concurrent with alcohol use disorder, the choice and timing of pharmacological agents, organization of care, selection of best-evidence psychotherapeutic approaches and their integration into clinical practice, management of patients’ and team expectations in terms of clinical outcomes, as well as the implementation of measurement-based approaches to optimize care delivery and achieve better clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Seven clinically relevant problems were reviewed and the evidence-based ready-to-implement clinical approaches were offered. Objectifs: La dépression majeure et la consommation d’alcool sont très répandues dans la population canadienne. Ils sont les principaux contributeurs à l’invalidité et à la diminution de la qualité de vie et, comme ils sont souvent comorbides les uns avec les autres, le diagnostic et le traitement de la dépression concomitante et des troubles liés à la consommation d’alcool représentent une tâche difficile avec de multiples questions cliniques nécessitant des recommandations fondées sur des preuves. Ainsi, le but de cet article est d’examiner les stratégies optimales pour traiter la consommation concomitante d’alcool et les troubles dépressifs majeurs dans le contexte des résultats de recherche actuels et de la pratique clinique. Méthodes: Revue narrative, synthèse des connaissances, analyse des données secondaires. Résultats: Sur la base de la revue de la littérature pertinente et des analyses de données secondaires de nos propres données cliniques, nous avons conçu un ensemble de recommandations cliniques pragmatiques et de conseils sur le diagnostic différentiel entre les troubles de l’humeur induits par l’alcool et les troubles dépressifs majeurs indépendants concomitants avec les troubles liés à la consommation d’alcool, le choix et le timing des agents pharmacologiques, l’organisation des soins, la sélection des approches psychothérapeutiques les plus probantes et leur intégration dans la pratique clinique, la gestion des attentes des patients et des équipes en terme de résultats cliniques ainsi que la mise en œuvre d’approches basées sur la mesure afin d’optimiser la prestation des soins et obtenir de meilleurs résultats cliniques. Conclusions: Sept problèmes cliniquement pertinents ont été examinés et des approches cliniques fondées sur des preuves prêtes à être mises en œuvre ont été proposées.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.303 · 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