Effect of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) on Depression in Patients With Myocardial Infarction (MI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease is the most important cause of death and inability in all communities. Depressive symptoms are frequent among post-myocardial infarction (MI) patients and may cause negative effects on cardiac prognosis. This study was conducted to identify efficacy of EMDR on depression of patients with MI. METHODS: This study is a clinical trial. Sixty patients with MI were selected by simple sampling, and were separated randomly into experimental and control groups. To collect data, demographic questionnaire and Beck Depression Questionnaire were used. In experimental group, EMDR therapy were performed in three sessions alternate days for 45-90 minutes, during four months after their MI. Depression level of patients was measured before, and a week after EMDR therapy. Data were analyzed using paired -t- test, t-test, and Chi-square. RESULTS: The mean depression level in experimental group 27.26±6.41 before intervention, and it was 11.76±3.71 after intervention. Hence, it showed a statistically significant difference (P<0.001). The mean depression level in control group was 24.53±5.81 before intervention, and it was 31.66±6.09 after intervention, so it showed statistically significant difference (P<0.001). The comparison of mean depression level at post treatment, in both groups showed statistically significant difference (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: EMDR is an effective, useful, efficient, and non-invasive method for treatment and reducing depression in patients with MI.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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".