MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337977328 · doi:10.1176/appi.focus.20150043

Cognitive Dysfunction in Major Depressive Disorder: Assessment, Impact, and Management

2016· article· en· W2337977328 on OpenAlexaff
Trisha Chakrabarty, George Hadjipavlou, Raymond W. Lam

Bibliographic record

VenueFOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsCentre for Movement Disorders
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionMajor depressive disorderClinical psychologyMedicinePsychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive dysfunction is increasingly being recognized as an important clinical dimension in major depressive disorder. This review summarizes the existing data on the epidemiology, assessment, and treatment of cognitive dysfunction among nonelderly adults with the disorder. Overall, cognitive dysfunction is prevalent, persists through periods of symptom remission, and may be independently associated with functional outcomes. However, although the evidence increasingly suggests that clinicians should be heedful of their patients' cognitive functioning, there is as yet no consensus on how best to monitor cognition clinically. In addition, although most studies have reported improved cognition with antidepressant medications, psychotherapy, and neuromodulation, the clinical significance of these improvements is unclear, and high-level evidence to guide decision making is limited. Nonetheless, given the important functional implications, clinicians should assess and monitor cognition and optimize both medication and psychological treatments to mitigate cognitive dysfunction among patients with major depressive disorder.

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)0.001
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations82
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFOCUS The Journal of Lifelong Learning in PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207