MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973428015 · doi:10.4088/jcp.13r08939

The Relationship Between Neurocognitive and Psychosocial Functioning in Major Depressive Disorder

2014· review· en· W1973428015 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitivePsychosocialPsycINFOClinical psychologyMajor depressive disorderPsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)MEDLINENeuropsychologyPsychiatryMeta-analysisCognitionMedicinePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Neurocognitive deficits are demonstrated in major depressive disorder (MDD) and most likely contribute to the functional impairment experienced by affected individuals. We systematically reviewed the evidence on neurocognitive deficits and their relationship(s) to psychosocial functioning in MDD. DATA SOURCES: English-language literature was searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct, and PsycInfo databases for the years 1980-October 15, 2013, with the following terms: (depressive disorder or depressive disorder, major) and permutations of (cognitive, neurocognitive, neuropsych*) with (impairment, deficit, performance, test) and (quality of life; functional outcomes; outcome assessment, health care) or (assessment, outcomes; assessment, patient outcomes; outcomes assessment; outcomes assessments, patient). STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria were (1) nongeriatric adults (< 60 years) with a primary diagnosis of MDD by DSM-IV, ICD-9, or ICD-10 criteria; (2) use of neuropsychological tests; and (3) use of a specific measure of social, occupational, or daily functioning. Of 488 articles identified in the initial search, 10 met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent appraisers assessed eligibility of the studies. Substantial heterogeneity in the samples and methods precluded a quantitative meta-analysis, so we performed a narrative descriptive review. RESULTS: The included studies employed a variety of neurocognitive tests and assessments of psychosocial functioning. Overall, depressed samples had neurocognitive deficits in various domains that were associated with different measures of psychosocial functioning. However, these findings were constrained by methodological limitations of studies. CONCLUSIONS: The limited evidence base suggests that neurocognitive functioning appears to be broadly associated with functional impairment in individuals with MDD, but the quality of evidence is weak. Further studies to clarify the relationship(s) between neurocognitive and psychosocial functioning in MDD will benefit from larger and more homogeneous samples, prospective designs with multivariate analyses, and use of comprehensive assessments of psychosocial functioning that are validated in depressed populations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.341 · 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