Exploring cognitive symptoms in patients with unipolar and bipolar major depression: A comparative evaluation of subjective and objective performance

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Psychiatry Research Pub Date : 2025-02-28 DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2025.116422
Gianluca Rosso , Giorgia Porceddu , Caterina Portaluppi , Camilla Garrone , Gabriele Di Salvo , Giuseppe Maina
{"title":"Exploring cognitive symptoms in patients with unipolar and bipolar major depression: A comparative evaluation of subjective and objective performance","authors":"Gianluca Rosso ,&nbsp;Giorgia Porceddu ,&nbsp;Caterina Portaluppi ,&nbsp;Camilla Garrone ,&nbsp;Gabriele Di Salvo ,&nbsp;Giuseppe Maina","doi":"10.1016/j.psychres.2025.116422","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Aim</h3><div>This cross-sectional observational study aimed to assess objective and subjective cognitive deficits in patients with unipolar (UD) and bipolar depression (BD), focusing on their insight into actual cognitive abilities.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A total of 124 participants were recruited: 84 patients with a current major depressive episode (43 with UD, 41 with BD) and 40 age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Cognitive assessments were conducted using the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) for objective evaluation and the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-Depression-5-item (PDQ-<span>d</span>-5) for subjective assessment. Comparisons were performed using χ² tests for categorical variables and ANCOVA for continuous variables (to compare the severity of cognitive complaints and impairment, while controlling for illness duration and age at onset). The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between subjective and objective measures.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In the objective assessment, 72.1 % of UD patients and 68.3 % of BD patients showed cognitive symptoms, with nearly half classified as moderate to severe. No significant differences were found between UD and BD in objective cognitive profiles. In subjective assessments, 39.5 % of UD patients and 46.3 % of BD patients scored below the median. BD patients reported worse subjective cognitive performance than UD patients, with lower total scores (11.1 ± 3.2 vs. 7.9 ± 4.4, <em>p &lt;</em> &lt; 0.001) and poorer performance in planning (2.8 ± 1.5 vs. 1.9 ± 1.4, <em>p &lt;</em> &lt; 0.001) and attention (3.4 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 1.5, <em>p &lt;</em> .001) domains.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study confirms significant cognitive symptoms in both UD and BD patients. The discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive performance in BD patients suggests a disconnect between perceived and cognitive abilities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20819,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry Research","volume":"347 ","pages":"Article 116422"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016517812500071X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim

This cross-sectional observational study aimed to assess objective and subjective cognitive deficits in patients with unipolar (UD) and bipolar depression (BD), focusing on their insight into actual cognitive abilities.

Methods

A total of 124 participants were recruited: 84 patients with a current major depressive episode (43 with UD, 41 with BD) and 40 age- and gender-matched healthy controls. Cognitive assessments were conducted using the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP) for objective evaluation and the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-Depression-5-item (PDQ-d-5) for subjective assessment. Comparisons were performed using χ² tests for categorical variables and ANCOVA for continuous variables (to compare the severity of cognitive complaints and impairment, while controlling for illness duration and age at onset). The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to examine the relationship between subjective and objective measures.

Results

In the objective assessment, 72.1 % of UD patients and 68.3 % of BD patients showed cognitive symptoms, with nearly half classified as moderate to severe. No significant differences were found between UD and BD in objective cognitive profiles. In subjective assessments, 39.5 % of UD patients and 46.3 % of BD patients scored below the median. BD patients reported worse subjective cognitive performance than UD patients, with lower total scores (11.1 ± 3.2 vs. 7.9 ± 4.4, p < < 0.001) and poorer performance in planning (2.8 ± 1.5 vs. 1.9 ± 1.4, p < < 0.001) and attention (3.4 ± 0.9 vs. 2.3 ± 1.5, p < .001) domains.

Conclusion

This study confirms significant cognitive symptoms in both UD and BD patients. The discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive performance in BD patients suggests a disconnect between perceived and cognitive abilities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
探索单极和双相抑郁症患者的认知症状:主观和客观表现的比较评价
目的本横断面观察性研究旨在评估单极(UD)和双相抑郁症(BD)患者的客观和主观认知缺陷,重点关注他们对实际认知能力的了解。方法共招募124名参与者:84名患有重度抑郁发作的患者(43名患有UD, 41名患有BD)和40名年龄和性别匹配的健康对照。认知评估采用精神病学认知障碍筛查(SCIP)进行客观评估,主观评估采用认知缺陷问卷-抑郁-5 (PDQ-d-5)进行主观评估。分类变量采用χ 2检验,连续变量采用ANCOVA检验(比较认知主诉和损害的严重程度,同时控制病程和发病年龄)。使用Pearson相关系数来检验主观和客观测量之间的关系。结果在客观评价中,72.1%的UD患者和68.3%的BD患者表现出认知症状,其中近一半为中度至重度。两组患者在客观认知方面无显著差异。在主观评估中,39.5%的UD患者和46.3%的BD患者得分低于中位数。BD患者的主观认知表现较UD患者差,总分较低(11.1±3.2比7.9±4.4,p <;& lt;0.001)和较差的计划表现(2.8±1.5比1.9±1.4,p <;& lt;0.001)和注意力(3.4±0.9 vs. 2.3±1.5,p <;措施)域。结论本研究证实了UD和BD患者均存在显著的认知症状。双相障碍患者主观和客观认知表现的差异表明感知能力和认知能力之间存在脱节。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychiatry Research
Psychiatry Research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
17.40
自引率
1.80%
发文量
527
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Psychiatry Research offers swift publication of comprehensive research reports and reviews within the field of psychiatry. The scope of the journal encompasses: Biochemical, physiological, neuroanatomic, genetic, neurocognitive, and psychosocial determinants of psychiatric disorders. Diagnostic assessments of psychiatric disorders. Evaluations that pursue hypotheses about the cause or causes of psychiatric diseases. Evaluations of pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic psychiatric treatments. Basic neuroscience studies related to animal or neurochemical models for psychiatric disorders. Methodological advances, such as instrumentation, clinical scales, and assays directly applicable to psychiatric research.
期刊最新文献
Polygenic risk scores for pediatric obsessive-compulsive symptoms: Mediating effects in samples clinically diagnosed with mental disorders. Comment on "Prevalence of subthreshold depression among older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review and meta-analysis". Plasma proteome demonstrates sex-specific associations with mental health risks in adolescents. Non-suicidal self-injury in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review and Meta-analysis with Age- and Sex-stratified findings. Evaluating ethnoracial differences in treatment outcomes: A critical review of CBT and DBT effectiveness in partial hospital programs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1