MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Maintenance Treatment of Depression in Old Age

2011· article· en· W2110379660 on OpenAlexaff
Charles F. Reynolds, Meryl A. Butters, Oscar L. López, Bruce G. Pollock, Mary Amanda Dew, Benoit H. Mulsant, Eric J. Lenze, Margo B. Holm, Joan C. Rogers, Sati Mazumdar, Patricia R. Houck, Amy Begley, Stewart Anderson, Jordan F. Karp, Mark D. Miller, Ellen M. Whyte, Jacqueline Stack, Ariel Gildengers, Katalin Szántó, Salem Bensasi, Daniel Kaufer, M. Ilyas Kamboh, Steven T. DeKosky

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of General Psychiatry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institute on AgingCenters for Disease Control and Prevention
KeywordsDonepezilPlaceboHazard ratioDepression (economics)Late life depressionPharmacotherapyDementiaPsychologyPsychiatryRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineAntidepressantMedicineConfidence intervalCognitionDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Cognitive impairment in late-life depression is a core feature of the illness. OBJECTIVE: To test whether donepezil hydrochloride and antidepressant therapy is superior to placebo and antidepressant therapy in improving cognitive performance and instrumental activities of daily living and in reducing recurrences of depression over 2 years of maintenance treatment. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled maintenance trial. SETTING: University clinic. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred thirty older adults aged 65 years and older with recently remitted major depression. INTERVENTIONS: Random assignment to maintenance antidepressant pharmacotherapy and donepezil or to maintenance antidepressant pharmacotherapy and placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Global neuropsychological performance, cognitive instrumental activities of daily living, and recurrent depression. RESULTS: Donepezil and antidepressant therapy temporarily improved global cognition (treatment × time interaction, F₂,₂₁₆ = 3.78; P = .03), but effect sizes were small (Cohen d = 0.27, group difference at 1 year). A marginal benefit to cognitive instrumental activities of daily living was also observed (treatment × time interaction, F₂,₁₃₇ = 2.94; P = .06). The donepezil group was more likely than the placebo group to experience recurrent major depression (35% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 24%-46%] vs 19% [95% CI, 9%-29%], respectively; log-rank χ² = 3.97; P = .05; hazard ratio = 2.09 [95% CI, 1.00-4.41]). Post hoc subgroup analyses showed that of 57 participants with mild cognitive impairment, 3 of 30 participants (10% [95% CI, 0%-21%]) receiving donepezil and 9 of 27 participants (33% [95% CI, 16%-51%]) receiving placebo had a conversion to dementia over 2 years (Fisher exact test, P = .05). The mild cognitive impairment subgroup had recurrence rates of major depression of 44% with donepezil vs 12% with placebo (likelihood ratio = 4.91; P = .03). The subgroup with normal cognition (n = 73) showed no benefit with donepezil and no increase in recurrence of major depression. CONCLUSIONS: Whether a cholinesterase inhibitor should be used as augmentation in the maintenance treatment of late-life depression depends on a careful weighing of risks and benefits in those with mild cognitive impairment. In cognitively intact patients, donepezil appears to have no clear benefit for preventing progression to mild cognitive impairment or dementia or for preventing recurrence of depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00177671.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations170
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of General PsychiatrySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207