Changes of adrenocorticotropic hormone rhythm and cortisol circadian rhythm in patients with depression complicated with anxiety and their effects on the psychological state of patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This work was to explore the rhythm of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol in patients with depression and anxiety and their effects on mental state. In this work, with depression complicated with anxiety patients as the A-MDD group (n= 21), and depression without anxiety symptoms as the NA-MDD group (n= 21). Firstly, data features were extracted according to the electroencephalo-graph (EEG) data of different patients, and a DR model was constructed for diagnosis. The Hamilton Depression Scale 24 (HAMD-24) was employed to evaluate the severity, and the ACTH and cortisol levels were detected and compared for patients in the A-MDD group and NA-MDD group. In addition, the psychological status of the patients was assessed using the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS). As a result, the AI-based DR model showed a high recognition accuracy for depression. The HAMD-24 score in the A-MDD group (31.81 ± 5.39 points) was statistically higher than the score in the NA-MDD group (25.25 ± 5.02 points) (P< 0.05). No visible difference was found in ACTH levels of patients in different groups (P> 0.05). The incidence of cortisol rhythm disorder (CRD) in the A-MDD group was much higher (P< 0.05). The differences in TAS scores between the two groups were significantly statistically significant (P< 0.01). In conclusion, the AI-based DR Model achieves a more accurate identification of depression; depression with or without anxiety has different effects on the mental state of patients. CRD may be one of the biological markers of depression combined with anxiety.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".