Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 372

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Coexistence of cognitive impairment and depression in geriatric outpatients

·1982·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

The authors diagnosed depression in 20 (23%) of 88 cognitively impaired geriatric outpatients. Three (20%) of these patients had depression only, and 17 (85%) had depression superimposed on an underlying dementia. The rate of coexisting depression decreased significantly with greater severity of the cognitive impairment: 9 (33%) of 27 mildly impaired patients were depressed, compared with 8 (23%) of 35 moderately impaired and 3 (12%) of 26 severely impaired patients. There was a nonsignificant trend for cognitively impaired women to be more likely to be depressed than for similarly impaired men. The authors conclude that although depression must be differentiated from dementia, it is equally important to consider the possibility that the diagnoses coexist.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1176/ajp.139.5.623

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1982-05-01
Volume
139
Issue
5
Pages
623-626
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2409678520
Cited by
372
References
0
FWCI
11.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.