MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W43412778

Commentary to QTc prolongation associated with atypical antipsychotic use in the treatment of adolescent-onset anorexia nervosa.

2009· article· en· W43412778 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dean Elbe

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQT intervalMedicineAdverse effectProlongationAnorexia nervosaAntipsychoticAdverse Event Reporting SystemSudden deathPediatricsInternal medicinePsychiatryIntensive care medicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Eating disorders
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, Ritchie & Norris remind us of the need to remain vigilant for drug-induced adverse reactions while treating patients with anorexia nervosa (AN). The authors are to be commended for their submission, as some recent studies show adverse reactions may be underreported by 80–95%, even for serious events (Hazell & Shakir, 2006). In other words, for every adverse event reported, it is reasonable to think that from 4–19 similar incidents have occurred elsewhere, but have not been formally reported. Drug-induced QTc interval prolongation has become a prominent issue as clinicians struggle with decision making around drug therapy in an era which has seen multiple drugs either restricted in their use or removed from the market due to QTc prolongation (Roden, 2004). A recent publication in a prominent journal demonstrated an increased rate of sudden cardiac death in an adult cohort for patients receiving atypical antipsychotics (Ray et al., 2009). A meta-analysis of AN patients showed that QTc interval was within normal range, though significantly longer than in controls. Electrocardiogram (ECG) data appears to have been collected at baseline prior to starting any drug therapy (Lesinskiene et al., 2008). Diurnal variation in QTc interval, controversy over choice of QT interval correction method and a relative lack of information in the literature about QTc effects of psychotropic drugs, especially in specific patient subgroups which may be at greater risk for sudden cardiac death further muddy the waters. There is hope, however, as the currently underway Canadian trial investigating the efficacy and safety of adjunctive olanzapine in patients with AN will obtain ECG data at baseline and on treatment (Spettigue et al., 2008). Hopefully the trial (one of the trial investigators is a co-author of this case report) and others like it will shed more light on this complex issue.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0430.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→