MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Major Depression and Its Recurrences: Life Course Matters

2022· review· en· W4214557538 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Clinical Psychology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersJohn Simon Guggenheim Memorial FoundationWilliam K. Warren Foundation
KeywordsDepression (economics)PsychologyLife course approachPsychotherapistPsychiatryClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Major depression is one of the most prevalent and debilitating personal and public health conditions worldwide. Less appreciated is that depression's tremendous burdens are not shared equally among all who become depressed. Some will suffer recurrences over the rest of their lives, whereas half or more will never have a recurrence. Based on these two distinctive life course prototypes, we propose a subtype distinction for research on the origins and lifetime course of major depression. A pressing goal is to determine at the time of depression's first onset who will follow which clinical trajectory. The lack of recognition of this distinction has resulted in many obstacles, including conceptual biases, methodological oversights, and definitional dead ends. Current theories are reviewed and compared. The implications for contemporary diagnostic controversies, reevaluating research on treatment and prevention, and enhancing the predictive strength of traditionally weak indicators of recurrences and recurrent depression are discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.001

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 head0.461
GPT teacher head0.672
Teacher spread0.211 · 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