Factors associated with new onset of depression and anxiety symptoms differ by sex in the COPDGene study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Examine clinical and demographic variables associated with new onset depression and anxiety symptoms and assess moderation by sex in COPDGene, a cohort study of current and former smokers at risk for or with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Methods In the COPDGene study, 2653 adults had the hospital anxiety (HADS-A) and depression (HADS-D) scales available at phase 2 and 3, as well as clinical and demographic variables available at 2 and non-elevated HADS at phase 2. We defined new onset depression symptoms as HADS-D elevated at phase 3 (HADS-D ≥ 8) versus no new onset as HADS-D not elevated at either phase (HADS-D < 8). New onset anxiety symptoms were defined identically using HADS-A. We used logistic regression models among all participants and stratified by sex and assessed sex interactions for variables associated with the outcome for only one sex. Results Among males, COPD Assessment test (CAT) score was positively associated with new onset depression ( β = 0.08, p = 1.9 × 10 −5 ) and anxiety ( β = 0.06, p = 1.4 × 10 −3 ) symptoms. Among females, the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea was positively associated with new onset anxiety symptoms ( β = 0.33, p = 1.4 × 10 −3 ). We found sex by CAT score ( β = −0.06, p = 0.02) and sex by mMRC dyspnea (β = 0.42, p = 5.1 × 10 −3 ) interactions on new onset anxiety symptoms, and sex by CAT score interaction ( β = −0.05, p = 0.04) on new onset depression symptoms. Conclusions These findings highlight the importance of understanding factors that increase risk for depression and anxiety among smokers at risk for or with COPD and are moderated by sex.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".