Major depressive disorder: longitudinal symptomatic structure, relapse and recovery

Judd, Lewis L.

doi:10.1034/j.1600-0447.2001.t01-1-00003.x

Cited by 13 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cognitive performance may provide a way of “carving nature at its joints” within the schizophrenia spectrum and is of key importance in relation to functional outcome (Lepage et al, 2014) and the search for candidate endophenotypes of psychosis (Gur et al, 2007). A series of studies have found significantly more cognitive impairment in schizophrenia than in schizoaffective disorder (Bornstein et al, 1990; Goldstein et al, 2005; Gruber et al, 2006; Heinrichs et al, 2008; Hill et al, 2013; Lindenmayer et al, 1989; Maj, 1986; Stip et al, 2005; Torniainen et al, 2012), but many others report minimal or no differences between these groups (Amann et al, 2012; Beatty et al, 1993; Evans et al, 1999; Fiszdon et al, 2007; Gilvarry et al, 2001; Glahn et al, 2006; Gooding and Tallent, 2002; Hooper et al, 2010; Manschreck et al, 1997; Miller et al, 1996; Moses, 1984; Owoso et al, 2013; Pinna et al, 2014; Reichenberg et al, 2009; Roofeh et al, 2006; Savage et al, 2003; Silverstein et al, 1988; Szoke et al, 2008; Townsend et al, 2001). Patients with schizoaffective disorder exhibit a pattern of cognitive impairment that is similar to the findings obtained in patients with schizophrenia, but distinct from those with major depression and bipolar disorder (Abrams et al, 2008; Buchanan et al, 2005; Madre et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The continuing story of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: One condition or two?

Hartman

Heinrichs

Mashhadi

2019

Schizophrenia Research: Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder remain separable in diagnostic systems, the validity of the distinction is uncertain. This study asked whether schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder are distinguishable on selected cognitive, social cognitive and structural social brain measures. Outpatients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia (n = 44) or schizoaffective disorder (n = 29) and non-psychiatric control participants (n = 62) were studied. Patients were assessed clinically (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale) and all participants were administered a battery of cognitive (MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery; Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence, Wide Range Achievement Reading) and social cognitive (Reading the Mind in the Eyes, Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test; MSCEIT) tasks. In addition, participants underwent structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to yield cortical thickness data for 42 regions associated with the social brain network. Results showed no significant differences between patient groups on 17/18 cognitive/social cognitive and social brain cortical thickness measures. In contrast, schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder patients differed from controls on 16/18 and 11/18 measures respectively. Schizoaffective disorder patients outperformed schizophrenia patients on an emotion regulation task (MSCEIT). Schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder are largely indistinguishable on key cognitive, social cognitive and neural measures. The continuing separation of these syndromes in diagnostic systems and disease models requires is questionable and requires further attention.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The continuing story of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: One condition or two?

Hartman

Heinrichs

Mashhadi

2019

Schizophrenia Research: Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…10 It has been demonstrated that patients achieving remission function better, have lower rates of suicide, and are less likely to relapse than those who achieve only response. [11][12][13] Choosing remission, the more strict outcome criterion, by definition results in lower rates than with response as an outcome. The concern with this strategy is that it may reduce the variability of results, masking subtle differences between treatments and thus making it more difficult to demonstrate that one treatment is more effective than another.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Trial: A Review

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he STAR*D trial is one of several NIMH-sponsored effectiveness trials of mental health pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy that attempt to examine typical patients in a real-world setting. STAR*D differs from standard RCTs in 6 key ways. The first 3 pertain to study generalizability; that is, broad inclusion criteria with few exclusion criteria, the integration of patient choice, and open-label treatment. The latter 3 pertain to improving treatment strategies; that is, the use of measurement-based care, the use of remission as the primary outcome, and a sequenced treatment approach, including substitution, augmentation, and combination strategies. Rationale for the Effectiveness Study Commonly, RCTs in the unipolar major depression literature recruit patients who are carefully selected to have minimal psychiatric, medical, or substance comorbidities. 1,2 Further, as a result of growing placebo response rates in these trials,

show abstract

“… 27 30 31 32 Strikingly, one-fourth of subjects with MDD eventually became diagnosed with BD. 33 The main risk factor for the transition was subthreshold manic/hypomanic symptoms.…”

Section: Results ( Table 1 )mentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Cohort Studies for Mood Disorders

Jeon

Baek

Ahn

et al. 2016

Psychiatry Investig

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aimed to review currently available cohort studies of subjects with mood disorders such as major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD). Using the PubMed and KoreaMed databases, we reviewed eight major cohort studies. Most studies recruited participants with MDD and BD separately, so direct comparison of factors associated with diagnostic changes was difficult. Regular and frequent follow-up evaluations utilizing objective mood ratings and standardized evaluation methods in a naturalistic fashion are necessary to determine detailed clinical courses of mood disorders. Further, biological samples should also be collected to incorporate clinical findings in the development of new diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. An innovative cohort study that can serve as a platform for translational research for treatment and prevention of mood disorders is critical in determining clinical, psychosocial, neurobiological and genetic factors associated with long-term courses and consequences of mood disorders in Korean patients.

show abstract

Major depressive disorder: longitudinal symptomatic structure, relapse and recovery

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

The continuing story of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: One condition or two?

The continuing story of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: One condition or two?

The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Trial: A Review

Review of Cohort Studies for Mood Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About