Psychosocial Risk Factors in Poststroke Depression: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review systematically the psychosocial risk factors for poststroke depression. METHODS: Medline was searched using the key words "poststroke depression" (PSD) for the period January 1, 1966, to June 30, 2000; using the key words "cerebrovascular disease" and "depression" it was searched from June 1, 1996, to June 30, 2000. Corollary articles were obtained from the bibliographies. Inclusion criteria were as follows: original research in French or English; prospective, case-control or cross-sectional study design; assessment of PSD in the first 6 months following the stroke; an acceptable definition of depression; an acceptable definition of stroke; and at least one psychosocial risk factor. Interrater reliability was tested for the selection and quality of the articles. A qualitative risk factor analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The risk factors most consistently associated with PSD are a past history of depression, past personal psychiatric history, dysphasia, functional impairments, living alone, and poststroke social isolation. Risk factors not associated with PSD are dementia and cognitive impairment. Controversial risk factors are age, socioeconomic status (SES), prior social distress, dependency in regard to activities of daily living (ADL), and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Over approximately 30 years, some 25 qualitative studies have addressed psychosocial risk factors for PSD. Further studies should aim for quantitative analysis. The results suggest that identifying psychiatric history and preventing social deterioration and impairment should be part of multidisciplinary efforts to care for poststroke patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".