Cited by 95Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

The depression‐executive dysfunction (DED) syndrome and response to antidepressants: a meta‐analytic review

McLennan, Skye N., Mathias, Jane L.·2010·International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Abstract

Background: The depression‐executive dysfunction (DED) model predicts that cognitive impairment, particularly executive dysfunction, is associated with poor response to antidepressant medication. A meta‐analysis was undertaken to assess the evidence for this hypothesis. Methods: The PsycInfo and PubMed databases were searched to identify studies that examined response to antidepressant treatment in relation to pre‐treatment cognitive performance. Systematic screening yielded 17 eligible publications, providing data for 1269 individuals. Ninety cognitive tests and subtests were used by these studies; 30 were used by more than one study. Weighted mean Cohen's d effect sizes, 95% confidence intervals and Fail Safe Ns were calculated for these 30 tests. Results: Five cognitive tests provided good discrimination ( d w > 0.5) between patients who ultimately responded to antidepressant medication and those who failed to respond. One was a test of executive function but the remainder assessed other cognitive domains. Due to the small number of studies the influence of methodological factors, such as participant age and treatment duration, could not be statistically examined. However, a supplementary analysis restricted to nine studies where SSRIs were the only class of antidepressant revealed a similar pattern of results. Conclusions: Performance on selected tests of executive function and non‐executive cognitive functions is associated with response to anti‐depressant medication in some populations. The available evidence does not provide strong support for the DED model. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/gps.2431

Cites

54 of 54 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Pre-treatment EF predicts pharmacotherapy response in individuals with depression, schizophrenia, OCD, and BD.

    “In particular, EF predicts pharmacotherapy response in individuals with depression (e.g., McLennan and Mathias, 2010), schizophrenia (e.g., Kim et al., 2008), OCD (e.g., D’Alcante et al., 2012), and BD (e.g., Gruber et al., 2008).”
  • A meta-analysis of 17 studies of late-life major depressive disorder indicated that better performance on tests of executive function and non-executive function is associated with response to antidepressant treatment.

    “However, a meta-analysis of 17 studies of late-life MDD indicated that better performance on tests of executive function (i.e. Dementia Rating Scale initiation and perseveration subtest) and non-executive function (including two tests of psychomotor speed, one test of construction, and one test of memory) is associated with response to antidepressant treatment [79].”
  • Specific cognitive deficits per se do not offer a reliable basis for making clinical judgments about probable illness course.

    “Thus, the authors concluded that specific cognitive deficits per se do not offer a reliable basis for making clinical judgments about probable illness course, in contrast to the depression-executive dysfunction model, according to which the occurrence of executive dysfunction portends poor response to antidepressant medication.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McLennan, S. N., & Mathias, J. L.
Affiliations
The University of Adelaide (AU)
Corresponding author
Mathias, Jane L.
Venue
International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-05-07
Volume
25
Issue
10
Pages
933-944
ISSN
  • 0885-6230 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1166
OpenAlex
W2109315694
Cited by
95
References
54
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 5
FWCI
0.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Bank (Australian Catholic University) (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
executive dysfunction, cognitive impairment, antidepressant response, treatment-resistant depression, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, cognitive domain
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Cognition, Cognition Disorders, Depressive Disorder, Female, Humans, Male, Models, Biological, Executive Function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review