Psychotropic Drug–Related Weight Gain and Its Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psychotropic drug-related weight gain (PDWG) is a common occurrence and is highly associated with non-initiation, discontinuation, and dissatisfaction with psychiatric drugs. Moreover, PDWG intersects with the elevated risk for obesity and associated morbidity that has been amply reported in the psychiatric population. Evidence indicates that differential liability for PDWG exists for antipsychotics, antidepressants, and anticonvulsants. During the past two decades, agents within these classes have become available with significantly lower or no liability for PDWG and as such should be prioritized. Although lithium is associated with weight gain, the overall extent of weight gain is significantly lower than previously estimated. The benefit of lifestyle and behavioral modification for obesity and/or PDWG in psychiatric populations is established, with effectiveness similar to that in the general population. Metformin is the most studied pharmacological treatment in the prevention and treatment of PDWG, and promising data are emerging for glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (e.g., liraglutide, exenatide, semaglutide). Most pharmacologic antidotes for PDWG are supported with low-confidence data (e.g., topiramate, histamine-2 receptor antagonists). Future vistas for pharmacologic treatment for PDWG include large, adequately controlled studies with GLP-1 receptor agonists and possibly GLP-1/glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide co-agonists (e.g., tirzepatide) as well as specific dietary modifications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".