Patient Perspective of Cognitive Symptoms in Major Depressive Disorder: Retrospective Database and Prospective Survey Analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common and burdensome condition. The clinical understanding of MDD is shaped by current research, which lacks insight into the patient perspective. : This two-part study aimed to generate data from PatientsLikeMe, an online patient network, on the perception of cognitive symptoms and their prioritization in MDD. : A retrospective data analysis (study 1) was used to analyze data from the PatientsLikeMe community with self-reported MDD. Information on patient demographics, comorbidities, self-rated severity of MDD, treatment effectiveness, and specific symptoms of MDD was analyzed. A prospective electronic survey (study 2) was emailed to longstanding and recently active members of the PatientsLikeMe MDD community. Study 1 analysis informed the objectives of the study 2 survey, which were to determine symptom perception and prioritization, cognitive symptoms of MDD, residual symptoms, and medication effectiveness. : In study 1 (N=17,166), cognitive symptoms were frequently reported, including “severe” difficulty in concentrating (28%). Difficulty in concentrating was reported even among patients with no/mild depression (80%) and those who considered their treatment successful (17%). In study 2 (N=2525), 23% (118/508) of patients cited cognitive symptoms as a treatment priority. Cognitive symptoms correlated with depression severity, including difficulty in making decisions, concentrating, and thinking clearly (rs=0.32, 0.36, and 0.34, respectively). Cognitive symptoms interfered with meaningful relationships and daily life tasks and had a profound impact on patients’ ability to work and recover from depression. : Patients acknowledge that cognitive dysfunction in MDD limits their ability to recover fully and return to a normal level of social and occupational functioning. Further clinical understanding and characterization of MDD for symptom prioritization and relapse risk due to residual cognitive impairment are required to help patients return to normal cognitive function and aid their overall recovery.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".