MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015410400 · doi:10.1080/13607860802380672

The prevention of depression in nursing home residents: A randomized clinical trial of cognitive–behavioral therapy

2009· article· en· W2015410400 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

VenueAging & Mental Health · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsVernon Jubilee HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)Geriatric Depression ScaleMedicineIntervention (counseling)Coping (psychology)CognitionPsychiatryGeriatric psychiatryClinical psychologyPsychologyDepressive symptoms

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevention of depression in individuals who are at risk is important for affected individuals, their family members, and for society at large. This study presents the results of a randomized clinical trial aimed at the prevention of depression in nursing home residents. Residents were screened with the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) and a diagnostic interview. Those with elevated GDS scores who did not meet diagnostic criteria for depression were randomly assigned to a treatment or control (treatment as usual, TAU) condition. The treatment was an adaptation of the Coping with Stress program developed by Clarke et al. (1995 Clarke, GN, Hawkins, W, Murphy, M, Sheeber, L, Lewinsohn, PM and Seeley, JR. 1995. Targeted prevention of unipolar depressive disorder in an at-risk sample of high school adolescents: A randomized trial of group cognitive intervention. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34: 312–321. [Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34, 312–321), and focused on various components typical of cognitive–behavioral treatment (CBT) programs (e.g. increasing pleasant events, reducing negative cognitions). Both groups were assessed on measures of depression before treatment, after treatment, and at 3- and 6-month follow-up points. Compared with the TAU group, residents receiving the intervention showed considerable improvement over the 6-month follow-up on the GDS. Average scores on the GDS, for example, went from 14.0 to 9.4 in the CBT group over the course of treatment and follow-up, vs. scores from 13.4 to 12.3 for the TAU group over the same time. However, results on the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale at 3 months were nonsignificant. Overall, the results of this study suggest that a brief, group-based CBT program can have significant benefit in nursing home residents at risk for 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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.452 · 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