Cognitive changes in patients with unipolar TRD treated with IV ketamine: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unipolar treatment-resistant depression (MDD-TRD) is associated with neurocognitive impairment. Ketamine, an emerging treatment for MDD-TRD, may have neurocognitive benefits, but evidence remains limited. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search on EMBASE, Google Scholar, PsycINFO, and PubMed and included studies exploring the cognitive effects of intravenous (IV) ketamine treatment in the management of MDD-TRD following the PRISMA guidelines. We analyzed cognitive scale score changes pre- and post-IV ketamine treatment and the quality of the evidence using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Out of 1171 identified studies, fourteen studies were included in this study. Most studies reported positive cognitive outcomes post-ketamine treatment, including improvements in processing speed, working memory, verbal and visual memory, executive function, attention, emotional processing, and auditory verbal episodic memory. Variability existed, with one study reporting negative effects on verbal memory. Overall, studies exhibited a low risk of bias. LIMITATIONS: Several limitations impacted the results observed, including confining our scope to articles in English, heterogeneity of the included studies, small sample sizes, and the predominance of a female, Western, and Caucasian population, constraining the generalizability of the findings. CONCLUSIONS: IV ketamine treatment shows promise in improving neurocognitive function in MDD-TRD patients. However, further research is warranted to elucidate long-term effects, control for confounders such as concomitant medications, and explore neurocognitive subgroups within the TRD population. These findings underscore the need for comprehensive assessment and management of cognitive symptoms in TRD, informing future clinical practice.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".