Six-month Follow-up of Cognitive Impairment and Depressive Symptoms in Late-onset Depression.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess cognitive performance in elderly depressed patients following treatment for 6 months. Remission rate of depression after 6 months of treatment was calculated. METHODS: The study was performed in a consecutive group of patients aged ≥ 65 years with late-onset depression. Severity of depression was assessed by the Hamilton Depression Scale, cognitive performance by the Hong Kong Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and functional level by the Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were recruited. In all, 28 (53.8%) were found to have cognitive impairment at baseline and 8 (28.6%) of them had improvement after 6 months. This cognitively impaired group was older and had a lower Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale score. The remission rate of depression was 61.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive impairment constituted a stable feature in a considerable number of elderly patients with depression. About two-thirds of patients achieved remission of depression after 6 months of treatment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".