Non-essential symptoms of depression and cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND) in community-dwelling elders without dysphoria or anhedonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several neuropsychiatric symptoms observed in elders with cognitive impairment no dementia (CIND) can be part of a major depressive episode (MDE) or a "subthreshold" depressive episode. Certain neuropsychiatric symptoms of CIND are essential symptoms of MDE (e.g. dysphoria, anhedonia), while other are non-essential symptoms (NESD; e.g. fatigue, insomnia, cognitive complaint). Contrary to essential symptoms, NESD are not specific to MDE and are present in other disorders. It is unknown whether NESD are linked to CIND in absence of MDE or subthreshold MDE. The present study examined the association between NESD and probable CIND in elders without essential MDE symptoms. METHODS: Participants were 2028 community-dwelling individuals aged 65-96 years who had not experienced dysphoria/anhedonia during the year preceding the interview. Semi-structured in-home interviews evaluated the following NESD: alteration of appetite, sleep disturbance, psychomotor alteration, fatigue/loss of energy, worthlessness/guilt, and cognitive complaints. Probable CIND cases were defined based on the Mini-mental State Examination cut-offs (15th percentile) stratified for age, education and sex. RESULTS: Symptoms of fatigue/loss of energy (OR: 2.41, 95% CI: 1.42-4.09), sleep disturbance (OR: 3.04 CI: 1.69-5.46) and cognitive complaints (OR: 2.86 CI: 1.71-4.77) were significantly associated with CIND. These associations were not modified after adjustments for potential confounders (age, education level, sex, benzodiazepine use, chronic diseases, and brain disorders). CONCLUSION: A psychiatric symptomatology occurs in older adults with CIND in the absence of MDE or subthreshold MDE. NESD encountered in the absence of dysphoria/anhedonia should receive particular attention by clinicians since they can be linked to cognitive difficulties.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".