2182 – Inhibition In Elderly Depressed Patients: An Eye Tracking Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Depression in people aged 65 and more appears to be a major public health problem. Efficient mechanisms of inhibition are important to communicate with other people and to interact with the environment but seem to be deficient in young depressed patients. This function needs to be evaluated in late life depression which has specific features. Method Twenty inpatients (mean age = 70.4) meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder were compared to forty seven healthy controls. They performed a neuropsychological and psychiatric assessments and two eye movement tasks: a prosaccades task to obtain basic parameters of eye movements and an antisaccade task to evaluate the inhibition capacities. Results In comparison with healthy subjects, depressed patients showed impaired performances in both oculomotor tasks. Concerning the prosaccade trial, depressed patients had higher reaction times and error rates than healthy controls. In both populations, hypometric saccades are the main kind of error. In the antisaccade task, reaction times and error rates were also higher in depressed patients than healthy subjects. However, the two populations showed similar correction rates. Conclusion The results of this study offer new insight on the inhibition impairment of aged major depressive patients by two simple eye movement tasks. The findings indicate psychomotor retardation and inhibition impairment, consistent with the findings obtained in young depressed subjects.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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".