MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159778054 · doi:10.1080/13803390500246944

The WAIS-III and Major Depression: Absence of VIQ/PIQ Differences

2006· article· en· W2159778054 on OpenAlexaff
Marianne Gorlyn, John G. Keilp, Maria A. Oquendo, Ainsley K. Burke, Harold A. Sackeïm, J. John Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsWechsler Adult Intelligence ScalePsychologyDepression (economics)Clinical psychologyMajor depressive episodeBorderline intellectual functioningMelancholiaIntelligence quotientVerbal reasoningPsychiatryIntellectual abilityAudiologyDevelopmental psychologyCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poor Performance IQ (PIQ) relative to Verbal IQ (VIQ) is a standard finding in depressed patients administered the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R). This study examined performance of depressed subjects on the instrument's latest revision, the WAIS-III, which provides a more detailed subdomain profile of intellectual functioning. WAIS-III IQ, index and subscale scores were compared between 121 unmedicated subjects in major depressive episode and 41 healthy volunteers, using demographically adjusted T-score conversions. Depressed subjects had significantly lower PIQ scores, but neither the absolute VIQ/PIQ difference nor prevalence of VIQ/PIQ discrepancies >1 SD differed between groups. Index score differences were exclusively in Processing Speed, and subtest differences only on timed tasks. WAIS-III scores did not differ between subjects with major depressive and bipolar disorders, nor between subjects with and without melancholia or history of suicidal behavior. Results suggest general intellectual performance in depression is best characterized by deficits in processing speed, rather than global nonverbal abilities, and that this deficit is consistent across depression subtypes.

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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.350 · 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

Citations54
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical and Experimental NeuropsychologySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207