MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117459099 · doi:10.1017/s1041610209991554

Antidepressant use and depressive symptomatology among older people from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing

2010· article· en· W2117459099 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ying Zhang, Veronica Chow, Agnès Vitry, Philip Ryan, Elizabeth E. Roughead, Gillian E. Caughey, Emmae Ramsay, Andrew L. Gilbert, Adrian Esterman, Mary A. Luszcz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Psychogeriatrics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Treatment and Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilAGE-WELLNational Institute on AgingALS Association
KeywordsAgeingAntidepressantLongitudinal studyPsychologyDepressive symptomsGerontologyDepression (economics)PsychiatryMedicineClinical psychologyCognitionInternal medicineAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Depression is one of the leading contributors to the burden of non-fatal diseases in Australia. Although there is an overall increasing trend in antidepressant use, the relationship between use of antidepressants and depressive symptomatology is not clear, particularly in the older population. METHODS: Data for this study were obtained from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ALSA), a cohort of 2087 people aged over 65 years at baseline. Four waves of home interviews were conducted between 1992 and 2004 to collect information on sociodemographic and health status. Depressive symptoms were measured by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies - Depression Scale. Use of antidepressants was based on self-report, with the interviewer able to check packaging details if available. Longitudinal analysis was performed using logistic generalized estimating equations to detect if there was any trend in the use of antidepressants, adjusting for potential confounding factors. RESULTS: The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 15.2% in 1992 and 15.8% in 2004 (p > 0.05). The prevalence of antidepressant users increased from 6.5% to 10.9% (p < 0.01) over this period. Among people with depressive symptoms, less than 20% were taking antidepressants at any wave. Among people without depressive symptoms, the prevalence of antidepressant use was 5.2% in 1992 and 12.0% in 2004 (p < 0.01). Being female (OR = 1.67, 95%CI: 1.25-2.24), having poor self-perceived health status (OR = 1.17, 95%CI: 1.04-1.32), having physical impairment (OR = 1.48, 95%CI: 1.14-1.91) and having depressive symptoms (OR = 1.62, 95%CI: 1.24-2.13) significantly increased the use of antidepressants, while living in community (OR = 0.51, 95%CI: 0.37-0.71) reduced the risk of antidepressant use. CONCLUSIONS: Use of antidepressants increased, while depressive symptoms remained stable, in the ALSA over a 12-year period. Use of antidepressants was low for people with depressive symptoms.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational PsychogeriatricsSame topicMental Health Treatment and AccessFrench-language works237,207