MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794212284 · doi:10.17116/jnevro20181182177-80

Treatment of depression with cognitive impairment

2018· article· en· W2794212284 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Yu Ter-Israelyan, В. И. Фролова, Elina Korovyakova, E V Gushanskaya

Bibliographic record

VenueS S Korsakov Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgomelatineMedicineTolerabilityDepression (economics)Stroop effectInternal medicineCognitive impairmentAnxietyAntidepressantMontreal Cognitive AssessmentMoodCognitionPsychiatryAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of monotherapy with agomelatine (valdoxan) in depressive patients with marked cognitive impairment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients (women 77.1%) were recruited to participate in the study. Mean age of patients was 48.9±3.5 years. The following scales and cognitive tests were used: HAM-21, CGI, HADS, MMSE, the Stroop task, the Rey test, RAVLT. Effective therapeutic doses of valdoxan were 25mg per day in 77.1% of patients, 50 mg per day beginning from week 2 in 22.9%. Cognitive impairment was found in astheno-apathic depression (51.4%), anxiety-hypochondriacal depression (28.6%), anhedonic depression (5.7%). RESULTS: The results showed that 74.3% of patients were responders and 51.4% were in remission. The dynamic of cognitive impairment demonstrated the positive effect of treatment with agomelatine (valdoxan). Beneficial safety profile of valdoxan was confirmed. CONCLUSION: Valdoxan is the effective and relatively safe antidepressant; it can be recommended for treatment of depression with cognitive impairment in therapeutic doses for at least 6 weeks.

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 score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueS S Korsakov Journal of Neurology and PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207