MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Predictive factors of depression in patients with cardiorespiratory failure

2019· article· en· W2990504835 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Guadalupe Lizzbett Luna Rodríguez, Lilian Victoria Romero-Pachicano, Casandra Pineda-Sánchez, Viridiana Peláez-Hernández, Arturo Orea‐Tejeda, Angelia Jiménez‐Valentín, María Fernanda Salgado-Fernández, Laura Arely Martínez-Bautista, Carlos Roberto Zepeda-Domínguez, Karla Leticia Rosales-Castillo, Alan Aldair Ibarra‐Fernández, Aimmé Flores-Vargas, Karla Balderas-Muñoz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiorespiratory fitnessDepression (economics)Intensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: One of the most common comorbidities to the COPD is the heart failure, the presence of both is called Cardiorespiratory Failure. In patients with this condition, the presence of depression is common, and this can lead to complications in the treatment such in the patient’s quality of life, even raising the mortality rate. Nevertheless, there are few researches that explore the factors that predict this comorbidity. Aim: To research the predictive factors of depression in patients with cardiorespiratory failure. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted, involving 83 patients with cardiorespiratory failure. The following test was used: SF-12 Questionnaire for evaluating the quality life, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) for evaluated the cognitive impairment, the Psychological Well-being Scale. A multiple regression model analysis was performed by means of the SPSS software version 25. Results: The age’s average was 67±14 years old, 55.42% were men. The regression model (F (3, 51) = 51.20, p < .001, R2 = .62) that includes: psychological well-being (t= -6.3, p= .000, β= -.441), cognitive impairment (t= -3.7, p= .000, β = -2.45), and anxiety (t= 5.8, p= .000, β = .414), they explain 62% of the total variance of the model, over the others variables clinic and psychological adjusted for age and sex. Conclusions: The present research shows that the psychological well-being, the cognitive impairment and the anxiety influence in the depression prevalence in these patients, beyond medical factors. Hence is important a multidisciplinary treatment focused on the management of these factors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCardiac Health and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→