MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334557683 · doi:10.1093/arclin/act002

Relationships Among Neurocognition, Symptoms, and Functioning in Treatment-Resistant Depression

2013· article· en· W2334557683 on OpenAlexaff
Manoj Gupta, K. Holshausen, M. Best, Ruzica Jokic, Roumen Milev, Thomas J. Bernard, Lingshan Gou, Christopher R. Bowie

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitiveFunctional impairmentTreatment-resistant depressionPsychologyDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsClinical psychologyCognitionMajor depressive disorderPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) refers to a condition where individuals with major depressive disorder have inadequate or no response to treatment. Although functional disability is a prominent and costly feature of treatment resistance, very little is known about the factors that contribute to and maintain functional impairment in TRD. This is the first study to report the neurocognitive profile of TRD and the relationships among neurocognition, symptoms, and functioning in this syndrome. Results indicated that patients with TRD (N = 33) exhibit mildly reduced performance across all neurocognitive domains with a superimposed moderate impairment in verbal working memory. Neurocognition was associated with functional competence (what one can do), whereas depressive symptoms were associated with functional performance (what one actually does). Understanding the psychological mechanisms related to functioning may help us move toward recovery in this chronically ill group.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

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

Citations53
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Clinical NeuropsychologySame topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesFrench-language works237,207