Effectiveness of Horticultural Therapy on Improving Memory, Alexithymia, and Severity of Symptoms in Patients with Persistent Depressive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depressive disorder causes unpleasant consequences in various areas of life, such as memory impairments and alexithymia. Based on this, this study aims to determine the effectiveness of horticultural therapy in improving memory, alexithymia, and reducing the severity of symptoms of patients suffering from persistent depressive disorder. The research design was semi-experimental and pre-test post-test with a control group. The statistical population of the present study includes all patients with persistent depressive disorder who met the criteria. 30 patients were selected by purposive sampling and randomly placed into experimental and control groups. The instruments used in the research were the Beck Depression Questionnaire, the Wechsler Working Memory Test, and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. Participants in the experimental group took part in group gardening activities twice a week during 8 2-hour sessions. While the members of the control group did not participate in these activities. After the post-test, the data were analyzed using multivariate covariance analysis by SPSS-24 software. The results of the research showed that horticultural therapy was effective in reducing the severity of depression symptoms in patients with persistent depression (P<0.05), but not effective in improving memory and reducing alexithymia (P<0.05). According to the results of the research, it is possible to suggest the use of horticultural therapy as an intervention method to reduce depression symptoms in patients with persistent depressive disorder, and patients with persistent depression can take the benefits of horticultural therapy to reduce their depression symptoms.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".