MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229078353 · doi:10.1186/s40337-022-00588-9

A case series of group-based ketamine-assisted psychotherapy for patients in residential treatment for eating disorders with comorbid depression and anxiety disorders

2022· article· en· W4229078353 on OpenAlexaff
Reid Robison, Adèle Lafrance, Madeline Brendle, Michelle Smith, Claire E. Moore, Sachin Ahuja, Scott Richards, Nicole A. Hawkins, Erin J. Strahan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Eating Disorders · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTolerabilityAnxietyKetamineMedicineEating disordersDosingDepression (economics)Adverse effectMoodPsychiatryClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depression and anxiety outcome measures, safety/tolerability, patient satisfaction, and ease of implementation of group-based ketamine-assisted psychotherapy (G-KAP) delivered to patients in intensive residential eating disorder (ED) treatment were assessed. CASE PRESENTATION: This study reports on five participants with a diagnosis of an ED and comorbid mood and anxiety disorders who received weekly intramuscular ketamine injections in a group setting over 4 weeks. Measures of anxiety (GAD-7) and depression (PHQ-9) were administered pre-dose, 4-h post-dose, and 24-h post dose. Four of the 5 participants experienced clinically significant improvements on the PHQ-9 score (i.e., change greater than 5) while 2 of the 5 participants experienced clinically significant improvements on the GAD-7 score (i.e., change greater than 4) from pre-dose to 24-h post-dose after the last ketamine session. Dosing sessions were well tolerated, and no serious adverse events were reported. Clinical observations and participant reports corroborated improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms, good tolerability of ketamine treatment, and practical implementation of the G-KAP protocol in a residential ED treatment center. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the potential utility of G-KAP as an adjunct to intensive, specialized ED treatment. Overall, this novel, cross-diagnostic intervention warrants future research to further explore its appropriateness in a treatment setting.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations33
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Eating DisordersSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207