MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Core symptoms of major depressive disorder: relevance to diagnosis and treatment

2008· article· en· W136483523 on OpenAlexaff
Sidney H. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueDialogues in Clinical Neuroscience · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoodPsychologyAnxietyPsychiatryClinical psychologySleep disorderDepression (economics)Dysfunctional familyMajor depressive disorderNeurocognitiveMood disordersInsomniaCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construct of major depressive disorder makes no etiological assumptions about populations with diverse symptom clusters. "Depressed mood" and "loss of interest or pleasure in nearly all activities" are core features of major depressive episode, though a strong case can be made to pay increasing attention to symptoms of fatigue, sleep disturbance, anxiety, and neurocognitive and sexual dysfunction in the diagnosis and evaluation of treatment outcome. Mood, guilt, work, and interest, as well as psychic anxiety, are consistently identified across validated subscales of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale as prevalent and sensitive to change with existing treatments. A major limitation of these antidepressant therapies is their narrow spectrum of action. While the core "mood and interest" symptoms have been the main focus of attention, the associated symptoms listed above are often unaffected or exacerbated by current treatments. Careful clinical evaluation should address all of these dimensions, recognizing that improvement may occur sooner in some symptoms (eg, mood) compared with others (eg, sleep disturbance).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
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

Citations378
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDialogues in Clinical NeuroscienceSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207