Psychosocial and Clinical Predictors of Symptom Persistence vs Remission in Major Depressive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study evaluates the impact of a range of psychosocial factors on the outcome of major depression while controlling for the effect of clinical variables. METHOD: Patients (n = 171) seen in consultation at a mood disorders clinic completed measures of neuroticism, rumination, coping style, sexual abuse history, and parental bonding experiences at Time 1 and completed measures of interpersonal and achievement life events and depression 12 months later. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, neuroticism, rumination, interpersonal and achievement life events, and sexual abuse history were associated with nonremission, whereas avoidance coping was associated with remission at Time 2. Interpersonal and achievement life events and sexual abuse history were associated with nonimprovement, whereas avoidance coping was associated with improvement at Time 2. Significant predictors of both remission and improvement in logistic regression analyses controlling for clinical variables (depression and anxiety severity, duration of illness, and age) included avoidance, interpersonal life events, and the interaction between avoidance and interpersonal life events. CONCLUSIONS: Interpersonal events and responses to depression (that is, coping) play an important role in the outcome of major depression. Further attention to coping style and interactions between psychological factors and life events is warranted in future research on depression persistence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".