MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414113943 · doi:10.1177/104012371202400105

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (Canmat) Task Force Recommendations for the Management of Patients with Mood Disorders and Comorbid Substance Use Disorders

2012· article· en· W4414113943 on OpenAlexaffabout
Serge Beaulieu, Sybille Saury, Jitender Sareen, Jacques Tremblay, Christian G. Schütz, Roger S. McIntyre, Ayal Schaffer

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Clinical Psychiatry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSchizophrenia research and treatment
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity Health NetworkCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of ManitobaDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill UniversityManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodComorbidityAnxietyMajor depressive disorderMood disordersBipolar disorderAlcohol use disorderDysthymic DisorderTolerability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Mood disorders, especially bipolar disorder (BD), frequently are associated with substance use disorders (SUDs). There are well-designed trials for the treatment of SUDs in the absence of a comorbid condition. However, one cannot generalize these study results to individuals with comorbid mood disorders, because therapeutic efficacy and/or safety and tolerability profiles may differ with the presence of the comorbid disorder. Therefore, a review of the available evidence is needed to provide guidance to clinicians facing the challenges of treating patients with comorbid mood disorders and SUDs. Methods We reviewed the literature published between January 1966 and November 2010 by using the following search strategies on PubMed. Search terms were bipolar disorder or depressive disorder, major (to exclude depression, postpartum; dysthymic disorder; cyclothymic disorder; and seasonal affective disorder) cross-referenced with alcohol or drug or substance and abuse or dependence or disorder . When possible, a level of evidence was determined for each treatment using the framework of previous Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments recommendations. The lack of evidence-based literature limited the authors’ ability to generate treatment recommendations that were strictly evidence based, and as such, recommendations were often based on the authors’ opinion. Results Even though a large number of treatments were investigated for alcohol use disorder (AUD), none have been sufficiently studied to justify the attribution of level 1 evidence in comorbid AUD with major depressive disorder (MDD) or BD. The available data allows us to generate first-choice recommendations for AUD comorbid with MDD and only third-choice recommendations for cocaine, heroin, and opiate SUD comorbid with MDD. No recommendations were possible for cannabis, amphet-amines, methamphetamines, or polysubstance SUD comorbid with MDD. First-choice recommendations were possible for alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine SUD comorbid with BD and only second-choice recommendations for heroin, amphetamine, methamphetamine, and polysubstance SUD comorbid with BD. No recommendations were possible for opiate SUD comorbid with BD. Finally, psychotherapies certainly are considered an essential component of the overall treatment of SUDs comorbid with mood disorders. However, further well-designed studies are needed in order to properly assess their potential role in specific SUDs comorbid with a mood disorder. Conclusions Although certain treatments show promise in the management of mood disorders comorbid with SUDs, additional well-designed studies are needed to properly assess their potential role in specific SUDs comorbid with a mood disorder.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0130.012
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0090.003
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.005

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.316 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicSchizophrenia research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207