MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200050718 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igab046.3110

Cognitive Changes in Older Adults Following a Stepped Care Intervention for Late-life Depression

2021· article· en· W4200050718 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Yan Zhang, Shiyu Lu, Tianyin Liu, Dara Kiu Yi Leung, Gloria Hoi Yan Wong, Terry Yat Sang Lum

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionVerbal fluency testDepression (economics)Psychological interventionIntervention (counseling)FluencyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychologyCognitive declinePsychiatryDementiaNeuropsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Older adults with depression may manifest cognitive decline and treating depression may maintain or improve cognition. However, cognitive outcomes could be overlooked in non-pharmacological interventions for depression. This analysis investigated cognitive changes in a stepped-care intervention (Clinical Trial ID: NCT03593889) and the potential association with individual depressive symptom change. The community-dwelling older adults at risk of or with depressive symptoms without significant cognitive impairment (n=802) were assigned to intervention group (n=644) and control group (n=138). Depressive symptoms and cognitive functions were measured using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Cognitive Montreal Assessment-5 minutes protocol, respectively. Paired-t-Test showed significant improvements in overall cognition and attention in both intervention and control groups, but the improvements of language fluency (Intervention: MD=-0.51 p<0.01; control: MD=0.14, p=0.500) and orientation (Intervention: MD=-0.22 p<0.05; control: MD=-0.11, p=0.229) only displayed in intervention group. As control group had better cognition at baseline, linear mixed-effects model analysis was used to compare between-group difference. Intervention group had no significant cognitive improvement after adjusting the covariates but a potential improvement in language fluency (Coef. =0.442, SE=0.247, p=0.074). A linear regression analysis in intervention group indicated that reduction of concentration problem (β=0.106, p<0.05) and retardedness (β=0.117, p<0.01) under the symptomatology of depression were associated with the improvement of language fluency. In this group of older persons without significant cognitive impairment, there is no clear evidence of global cognitive benefits in a stepped care depression intervention, although there may be improvements in certain cognitive domains, which may be related to improvements in cognitive aspects of depression.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.307 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207