Assessment of Objective and Subjective Cognitive Function in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression Undergoing Repeated Ketamine Infusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subanesthetic ketamine infusions can elicit rapid and sustained antidepressant effects, yet the potential cognitive impact of ketamine has not been thoroughly examined. This study measured changes in objective and subjective cognitive function following repeated ketamine treatment. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients with treatment-resistant depression were administered cognitive assessments before and after undergoing 7 i.v. ketamine infusions (0.5 mg/kg over 40 minutes) within a clinical trial examining the efficacy of single and repeated administrations. Depression severity and perceived concentration were evaluated with the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms Self-Report. RESULTS: Twenty-three participants (60.5%) responded after repeated infusions (≥50% decrease in MADRS total scores). We measured significant improvements in several cognitive domains, including attention, working memory, verbal, and visuospatial memory (effect sizes ranging from Cohen d = 0.37-0.79). Cognitive changes were attributed to reduction in depressive symptoms except for improvement in verbal memory, which remained significant after adjustment for change in MADRS total score (P = .029, η p2 = 0.13). Only responders reported improvement in subjective cognitive function with repeated ketamine administration (MADRS item 6, P < .001, d = 2.00; Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms Self-Report item 10, P < .001, d = 1.36). CONCLUSION: A short course of repeated ketamine infusions did not impair neurocognitive function in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Further research is required to understand the potential mediating role of response and remission on improved cognitive function accompanying ketamine treatment as well as to examine longer-term safety outcomes. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01945047.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".