Cognition, Plasticity, and Functioning After Childhood Adversity in Major Depressive Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There is a compelling association between childhood adversity and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) in adulthood, including more severe and treatment-resistant presentations of illness. Childhood adversity is also related to deficits in neurocognition, smaller hippocampal volume, and changes in structural and functional brain connectivity. At the same time, neurocognitive impairment accompanies many cases of MDD, but the extent to which childhood adversity accounts for cognitive variance has not been investigated. Furthermore, it is unclear whether adversity is related to plasticity, indicated by response to neurocognitive treatment, and if the relationship between cognition and functioning differs among individuals based on their history of childhood adversity. Objective: The current research sought to clarify how early adversity and select characteristics of illness relate to cognitive differences in MDD, as well as response to Cognitive Remediation (CR), a treatment that promotes neurogenesis and plasticity through cognitive exercise and compensatory strategies. In addition, this project examined the moderating role of adversity in the relationship between cognition and skills required for everyday functioning. Method: Thirty-nine individuals with MDD who previously completed a 10-week CR intervention, as well as neurocognitive and functional skills testing, were re-recruited to engage in a retrospective interview on childhood adversity. Results: More adversity endured as a child and repeated depressive episodes were associated with poorer cognition in adulthood, B = -.45, t(36) = -3.34, p = .002, and B = -.33, t(36) = -2.53, p = .017, together accounting for 37.4% of variance in cognition. Childhood adversity was associated with more improvement following CR, but this relationship was small in magnitude, ∆R2 = .05, ∆F(2, 36) = 4.36, p = .044. A significant association between cognition and functional performance was apparent only among individuals who experienced high levels of adversity, b = .63, SE = .25, p = .018. Conclusions: Our findings highlight childhood adversity and multiple depressive episodes as factors associated with cognitive impairment in MDD. We emphasize early trauma as an important variable to be addressed in neurocognitive treatment and research.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".