MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6891528857 · doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672⁃6731.2023.04.005

The relationship between depression and cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment

2023· article· en· W6891528857 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVerbal fluency testDepression (economics)CognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentTrail Making TestGeriatric Depression ScaleStroop effectCognitive impairmentVerbal learning

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Objective To explore the relationship between depression and cognitive function in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods Total 106 patients with MCI were selected from December 2020 to December 2021, including 53 patients with depression based on Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Total 106 normal cognitive function people who received physical examination at the same time were selected, also including 53 with depression. Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were used to evaluate overall cognitive function, Rey⁃Osterrieth Complex Figure Test (ROCFT) and Clock Drawing Test (CDT) were used to evaluate visual spatial ability, Logical Memory Test (LMT) and Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) were used to evaluate memory, Stroop Colour⁃Word Test (SCWT) and Trail Making Test (TMT) were used to evaluate attention and executive function, Verbal Fluency Test (VFT) and Boston Naming Test (BNT) were used to evaluate verbal fluency and naming ability, and Activities of Daily Living Scale (ADL) were used to evaluate activities of daily living. Results There were statistically significant differences in cognitive function of multiple dimensions among 4 groups (P<0.05, for all). The MMSE and MoCA scores of the MCI group with depression were lower than those of the control group (P=0.000, for all), the depression group (P=0.000, for all) and the MCI group without depression (P=0.000, for all). The ROCFT⁃imitation, recall, and CDT scores in the MCI group with depression were lower than those in the control group (P=0.000, for all), the depression group (P=0.000, for all), and the MCI group without depression (P=0.000, for all). The LMT⁃immediate and delayed recall scores of the MCI group were lower than those of the control group (P=0.000, 0.000, 0.002, 0.001) and the depression group (P=0.000, 0.000, 0.040, 0.043). The LMT⁃delayed recall scores of the MCI group with depression were lower than those of the MCI group without depression (P=0.030). The AVLT⁃immediate recall, short delayed recall, long delayed recall, and recognition scores in the MCI group with depression were lower than those in the control group (P=0.000, for all), the depression group (P=0.000, for all), and the MCI group without depression (P=0.009, 0.003, 0.017, 0.001). The time of SCWT⁃A, SCWT⁃B and SCWT⁃C, TMT⁃A, and TMT⁃B in the MCI group with depression was longer than that in the control group (P=0.001, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000), the depression group (P=0.008, 0.001, 0.001, 0.001, 0.001), and the MCI group without depression (P=0.001, 0.000, 0.000, 0.000, 0.004). The correct number of SCWT⁃A, SCWT⁃B and SCWT⁃C was less than that in the control group (P=0.003, 0.008, 0.001), and the depression group (P=0.016, 0.031, 0.002). The correct number of SCWT⁃A and SCWT⁃C was lower than that of the MCI group without depressive (P=0.003, 0.008). The correct number of VFT⁃animals and vegetables, BNT in the MCI group with depression was lower than that in the control group (P=0.000, for all), the depression group (P=0.016, 0.003, 0.000), and the MCI group without depression (P=0.010, 0.005, 0.000). The ADL score of the MCI group with depression was higher than that of the control group (P=0.000), the depression group (P=0.001), and the MCI group without depression (P=0.000), while the ADL score of the depression group was higher than that of the control group (P=0.014) and the MCI group without depression (P = 0.001). The GDS scores of the control group and the MCI group without depressive were lower than those of the depressive group (P=0.000, for all) and the MCI group with depression (P=0.000, for all). Correlation analysis showed that GDS scores were correlated with MMSE (r=⁃0.300, P=0.000), MoCA (r=⁃0.357, P=0.000), ROCFT⁃copy (r=⁃0.192, P=0.006) and recall (r=⁃0.142, P=0.044), CDT (r=⁃0.171, P=0.015), LMT⁃immediate recall (r=⁃0.213, P=0.002), delayed recall (r=⁃0.193, P=0.005), AVLT⁃immediate recall (r=⁃0.159, P=0.021), short delay recall (r=⁃0.161, P=0.020) and long delay recall (r=⁃0.137, P=0.047), correct number of SCWT⁃A (r=⁃0.156, P=0.025), VFT⁃animals (r=⁃0.271, P=0.000) and vegetables (r=⁃0.145, P=0.038), BNT (r=⁃0.194, P=0.005) were negatively correlated; compared with the completion time of SCWT⁃A (r=0.162, P=0.020), SCWT⁃B (r=0.189, P=0.007), SCWT⁃C (r=0.184, P=0.009) and TMT⁃A (r=0.189, P=0.006), and ADL score (r=0.367, P=0.000) were positively correlated. Conclusions MCI patients with depression have more extensive and severe cognitive deficits, and their psycho⁃mental states should be paid more attention.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,005

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,202
Tête enseignante GPT0,530
Écart entre enseignants0,328 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Même sujetDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→Travaux en français237 207→