MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W62157228 · doi:10.1177/070674370004500509

Strategies for Managing Depression Refractory to Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Treatment: A Survey of Clinicians

2000· article· en· W62157228 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David Mischoulon, Andrew A. Nierenberg, Leena Kizilbash, Jerrold F. Rosenbaum, Maurizio Fava

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBupropionSerotonin reuptake inhibitorReuptake inhibitorChosePsychiatryAntidepressantMedicineDepression (economics)PsychologyAnxietySmoking cessation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To examine treatment practices in cases where selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are ineffective. METHODS: We surveyed 801 clinicians (including 630 psychiatrists) attending the Massachusetts General Hospital's annual psychopharmacology review course. Clinicians were presented with a vignette about a patient with depression who had responded partially to an SSRI and were asked to choose among various strategies available to manage this patient. RESULTS: Of those surveyed, 466 clinicians had been in practice a mean of 16.6 years (SD 10.7). Not all clinicians chose to answer every question. Among 455 respondents, 84% (n = 382) chose to increase the dose of the SSRI, 10% (n = 47) chose augmentation or combination, and 7% (n = 31) opted for switching agents. When asked to switch to another agent, 448 responded, of whom 52% (n = 235) chose a newer antidepressant, 34% (n = 152) chose another SSRI, 10% (n = 44) chose a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), 2% (n = 8) chose a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI), 1% (n = 5) chose a monoamine oxidase inhibitor (MAOI), and 1% (n = 4) chose an undefined "other" agent. Among 445 respondents, bupropion was the most widely chosen augmenting agent (30%, n = 134), followed by lithium (22%, n = 98). West coast and Canadian clinicians preferred to switch to another SSRI rather than to a newer antidepressant. Canadian clinicians preferred lithium to bupropion as their first-choice augmenting agent, as did clinicians from academic settings. Clinicians from community, individual practice, or group settings favoured bupropion. More experienced clinicians preferred bupropion as a first-choice augmenter, whereas less experienced ones showed a slight preference for lithium. Canadian clinicians were more likely to use MAOIs as second-line agents. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians in this sample often followed strategies different from those recommended in the literature. Bupropion may have an important role in augmentating treatment with SSRIs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations80
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207