MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W71179497 · doi:10.1177/070674371005501104

Are There Guidelines for the Responsible Prescription of Benzodiazepines?

2010· article· en· W71179497 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Nady el‐Guebaly, Jitender Sareen, Murray B. Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaDeer Lodge CentreUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health Services
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAnxietyPsychiatryMedical prescriptionMedicineSedativeAnxiolyticPopulationMood disordersBenzodiazepineMoodSedative/hypnoticPsychologyInternal medicinePharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Prevalence of Prescriptions and Their IndicationsB enzodiazepines are reportedly the most frequently pre- scribed psychotropic medication.Among adults in the United States and Canada, 3% to 4% are using BDZs at any one time.1 About 100 million prescriptions are written per year.The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (commonly referred to as ESEMeD) investigated the use of ADs and BDZs in 21 425 respondents from 6 countries.In the nonhelp-seeking population, BDZs were used more commonly than ADs, while in the help-seeking population, with a 12-month prevalence of major depressive disorder or anxiety disorder, BDZs were used as commonly as ADs. 2 In an Australian study, 3 16% of the adults aged 65 years and older (n = 3970) had at least 1 BDZ prescription and the prescription prevalence increased with age.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.104
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.104
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.011
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0110.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.010

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207