The influence of major depressive disorders on neurocognitive function among adults living with HIV/AIDS in a regional referral hospital in Dodoma, Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the influence of major depressive disorders (MDD) on the cognitive function of adults living with HIV and the prevalence of neurocognitive impairment and major depressive disorders. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional design conducted in a referral hospital in Dodoma region central Tanzania, with a sample of 397 participants attained through systematic sampling. Neurocognitive impairment was assessed by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), while MDD was assessed using Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I). Two-sample independent t-tests were done to compute the significance of the mean change of MoCA score between those with or without MDD. Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic regression models were computed to determine the association between MDD and neurocognitive impairment across all cognitive domains. RESULTS: Of 397 recruited participants, 266 (66.00%) met the criteria for neurocognitive disorder and 22 (5.51%) had major depressive disorder. Participants with MDD performed significantly poorer on cognitive testing than those without MDD (mean difference = 3.74, p-value = 0.0009). Under univariate ordinal regression, impairments in the particular domains of visuospatial-executive function, attention, language, abstraction and orientation were significantly associated with MDD and abstraction (AOR: 3.922, 95% CI: 1.546-9.947, p = 0.0004) remained significant under multivariable regression. CONCLUSION: Major depressive disorder may negatively influence neurocognitive performance in both severity and pattern of presentation. Routine screening for depressive symptoms in HIV care can be beneficial for the overall patient's outcome. Systematic and well-designed studies in the area are crucial for understanding the interaction of neuropsychiatric disorders in the HIV population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".