Long-term functioning outcomes are predicted by cognitive symptoms in working patients with major depressive disorder treated with vortioxetine: results from the AtWoRC study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: AtWoRC (Assessment in Work productivity and the Relationship with Cognitive symptoms) was an interventional, open-label, Canadian study (NCT02332954) designed to assess the association between cognitive symptoms and workplace productivity in working patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) receiving vortioxetine. METHODS: Eligible patients with MDD received vortioxetine (10-20 mg/day) and were assessed over 52 weeks at visits emulating a real-life setting (n = 199). Partial correlation between changes in patient-reported cognitive symptoms (20-item Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-Depression; PDQ-D-20) and workplace productivity (Work Limitations Questionnaire; WLQ) was assessed at 12 and 52 weeks. Additional assessments included depression severity, cognitive performance, and patient-reported functioning. Structural equations model (SEM) analyses assessed causal relationships between changes in measures of cognition and functioning over time, adjusted for improvements in depressive symptoms. RESULTS: Statistically significant improvements in all outcomes from baseline to week 52 were seen in the overall population and both subgroups (first treatment and switch). Response and remission rates were 77% and 56%, respectively. Improvements in PDQ-D-20 and WLQ productivity loss scores at weeks 12 and 52 were significantly correlated. SEM analyses found patient-rated cognitive symptoms (PDQ-D-20) at weeks 12 and 26 were significantly predictive (p < 0.05) of patient-reported functioning (Sheehan Disability Scale) at the subsequent visit. Depression severity and objectively measured cognitive performance did not significantly predict functional outcomes at any timepoint. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate the long-term benefits of vortioxetine treatment in working patients with MDD and emphasize the strong association between cognitive symptoms and functioning in a real-world setting.
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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".