The Role of Daily Steps in the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial of a 6-Month Internet-Based, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Intervention for Youth
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Current evidence supports physical activity (PA) as an adjunctive treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD). Few studies, however, have examined the relationship between objectively measured PA and MDD treatment outcomes using prospective data. OBJECTIVE: This study is a secondary analysis of data from a 24-week internet-based, mindfulness-based cognitive behavioral therapy program for MDD. The purpose of this analysis was twofold: (1) to examine average daily step counts in relation to MDD symptom improvement, and whether pain moderated this relationship; and (2) to examine whether changes in step activity (ie, step trajectories) during treatment were associated with baseline symptoms and symptom improvement. METHODS: Patients from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health were part of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of internet-based, mindfulness-based cognitive behavioral therapy for young adults (aged 18-30 years old) with MDD. Data from 20 participants who had completed the intervention were analyzed. PA, in the form of objectively measured steps, was measured using the Fitbit-HR Charge 2 (Fitbit Inc), and self-reported depression severity was measured with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Linear regression analysis was used to test PA's relationship with depression improvement and the moderating effect of pain severity and pain interference. Growth curve and multivariable regression models were used to test longitudinal associations. RESULTS: Participants walked an average of 8269 steps per day, and each additional +1000-step difference between participants was significantly associated with a 2.66-point greater improvement (reduction) in BDI-II, controlling for anxiety, pain interference, and adherence to Fitbit monitoring (P=.02). Pain severity appeared to moderate (reduce) the positive effect of average daily steps on BDI-II improvement (P=.03). Higher baseline depression and anxiety symptoms predicted less positive step trajectories throughout treatment (Ps≤.001), and more positive step trajectories early in the trial predicted greater MDD improvement at the end of the trial (Ps<.04). However, step trajectories across the full duration of the trial did not significantly predict MDD improvement (Ps=.40). CONCLUSIONS: This study used objective measurements to demonstrate positive associations between PA and depression improvement in the context of cognitive behavioral treatment. Pain appeared to moderate this relationship, and baseline symptoms of anxiety and depression predicted PA trajectories. The findings inform future interventions for major depression. Future research with larger samples should consider additional moderators of PA-related treatment success and the extent to which outcomes are related to PA change in multimodal interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov NCT03406052; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03406052. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/11591.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».