The effect of psychopharmacological load on various aspects of the condition in patients with depressive syndrome during remission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of the overall psychopharmacological load on the clinical presentation, the level of cognitive functioning, and some features of social cognition in patients with a history of a depressive episode. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 36 patients in remission after a depressive episode, receiving stable therapy. The mean age was 31 years (18-73; SD 16.8), 17 females (47%) and 19 males. The following assessment tools were used: Hamilton Scale for Depression, Hamilton Scale for Anxiety, Abbreviated Montreal Cognitive Assessment, and Emotion Attribution Test. Doses of drugs included in the therapeutic regimens were evaluated in the appropriate equivalents. RESULTS: Most patients had mild manifestations of depression or depression with anxiety. Indicators of cognitive performance were within reference range. The social cognition score according to the Emotion Attribution Test was below the reference. All but two patients received antidepressant therapy at an equivalent dose higher than the recommended dose. Only two patients received monotherapy. 28% of patients received antipsychotics at a dose below the average recommended dose in addition to antidepressants, 17% of patients received normothymic agents at a dose below the average recommended dose, 22% received benzodiazepine tranquilizers, and 42% received histaminergic sedatives. The cholinolytic load was moderately high in 44% of patients. No association was found between antidepressant load and clinical and cognitive parameters. The cholinolytic load did not affect the performance in cognitive tests, but reduced the ability of patients to adequately attribute emotions in the corresponding test. Patients treated with a combination of antidepressants and antipsychotics performed better in cognitive tests. CONCLUSION: The combination of relatively high doses of antidepressants with subtherapeutic doses of antipsychotic agents has the most multifaceted effect. Moderate cholinolytic load does not affect the cognitive performance of patients, but reduces their social cognition in terms of emotion attribution in the context of social interaction.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".