MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014201145 · doi:10.2147/cia.s27717

Depression in the elderly with visual impairment and its association with quality of life

2013· review· en· W2014201145 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

VenueClinical Interventions in Aging · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Impairment Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDepression (economics)Quality of life (healthcare)Visual impairmentAssociation (psychology)Psychological interventionPopulationDepressive symptomsGerontologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryCognitionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Visual impairment is more prevalent in the elderly and depression is common in this population. Although many studies have investigated depression or quality of life (QOL) in older adults with visual impairment, few have looked at the association between these two concepts for this population. The aim of this systematized review was to describe the association between depression and QOL in older adults with visual impairment. METHODS: A search was done using multiple electronic databases for studies addressing the relationship between QOL and depression in elders with visual impairment. The concept of QOL was divided into two different approaches, ie, QOL as achievement and QOL as subjective well-being. Comparison of QOL scores between participants with and without depression (Cohen's d) and correlations between depression and QOL (Pearson's r) were examined. RESULTS: Thirteen studies reported in 18 articles were included in the review. Nearly all of the studies revealed that better QOL was moderately to strongly correlated with less severe depressive symptoms (r = 0.22-0.68 for QOL as achievement; r = 0.68 and 0.72 for QOL as subjective well-being). Effect sizes for the QOL differences between the groups with and without depression ranged from small to large (d = 0.17 to 0.95 for QOL as achievement; no data for QOL as subjective well-being). CONCLUSION: Additional studies are necessary to pinpoint further the determinants and mediators of this relationship. Considering the high prevalence rate of depression in this community and its disabling effects on QOL, interventions to prevent and treat depression are essential. More efforts are needed in clinical settings to train health care practitioners to identify depressed elders with visual impairment and provide appropriate treatment.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.569
Teacher spread0.277 · 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