MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002439382 · doi:10.2190/pgwt-uxj0-7ueh-lgry

Major Depression and Quality of Life in Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis

2000· article· en· W2002439382 on OpenAlexafffundabout
JianLi Wang, Marlene Reimer, Luanne M. Metz, Scott B. Patten

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsDepression (economics)CIDIMultiple sclerosisQuality of life (healthcare)Mental healthMedicinePsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare the Quality of Life (QOL) of multiple sclerosis (MS) patients with and without lifetime major depression. METHOD: Data on 136 MS subjects sampled from the University of Calgary MS Clinic were collected. The WHO's Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) was used to diagnose lifetime major depression. The MSQOL-54 was administered to evaluate QOL of the subjects. RESULTS: Thirty one (22.8 percent) of the 136 MS subjects had lifetime major depression, However, only 6 of these had a current episode at the time of data collection. MS patients with lifetime major depression had significantly lower MSQOL-54 scores in the QOL domains of Energy, Mental Health, Cognitive Function, General Quality of Life, Sexual Function, and Role Limitation-Emotional than the MS patients without lifetime major depression. CONCLUSIONS: Lifetime major depression may have a substantial impact on the QOL of people with MS. Alternatively, MS patients with poor QOL may be at greater risk of major depression.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations109
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Psychiatry in MedicineSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207