4.7 Article

The effect of psychiatric co-morbidity on cognitive functioning in a population-based sample of depressed young adults

期刊

PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE
卷 40, 期 1, 页码 29-39

出版社

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291709005959

关键词

Cognitive impairment; co-morbidity; depression; population-based sample; young adult

资金

  1. Emil Aaltonen Foundation
  2. Academy of Finland
  3. Graduate School of Psychology in Finland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Psychiatric co-morbidity is often inadequately controlled for in studies on cognitive functioning in depression. Our recent study established no major deficits in cognition among young adults with a history of pure unipolar depression. The present study extends our previous work by examining the effects of psychiatric co-morbidity and other disorder characteristics on depression-related cognitive functioning. Method. Performance in verbal and visual short-term memory, verbal long-term memory and learning, attention, processing speed, and executive functioning was compared between a population-based sample aged 21-35 years with a lifetime history Of Unipolar depressive disorders (n = 126) and a random sample of healthy controls derived from the same population (n = 71). Cognitive functioning was also compared between the subgroups of pure (n = 69) and co-morbid (n = 57) depression. Results. The subgroups of pure and co-morbid depression did not differ in any of the cognitive measures assessed. Only mildly compromised verbal learning was found among depressed young adults in total, but no other cognitive deficits occurred. Received treatment was associated with more impaired verbal memory and executive functioning, and younger age at first disorder onset with more impaired executive functioning. Conclusions. Psychiatric co-morbidity may not aggravate cognitive functioning among depressed young adults. Regardless of co-morbidity, treatment seeking is associated with cognitive deficits, suggesting that these deficits relate to more distress.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据