The mediational role of cognitive function on occupational outcomes in persons with major depressive and bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improving functioning in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) is a priority therapeutic objective. METHODS: This retrospective post hoc secondary analysis evaluated 108 patients with MDD or BD receiving the antidepressants vortioxetine, ketamine, or infliximab. The analysis aimed to determine if changes in objective or subjective cognitive function mediated the relationship between depression symptom severity and workplace outcomes. Cognitive function was measured by the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ-5), the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST), and the Trail Making Test Part B (TMT-B). Depression symptom severity was measured by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Workplace function was measured by the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) work-school item. RESULTS: When co-varying for BMI, age, and sex, the association between MADRS and SDS work scores was partially mediated by PDQ-5 total scores and DSST total scores, but not DSST error scores and TMT-B time. LIMITATIONS: This study was insufficiently powered to perform sub-group analyses to identify distinctions between MDD and BD populations as well as between antidepressant agents. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that cognitive impairment in adults with MDD and BD is a critical mediator of workplace function and reinforces its importance as a therapeutic target.
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".