Cited by 132Treatment of Major DepressionDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Cognitive impairment and neurocognitive profiles in major depression: A clinical perspective

Open access
Hammar, Åsa, Ronold, Eivind Haga, Rekkedal, Guro Årdal·2022·Frontiers in Psychiatry

Abstract

. The etiological origin and clinical consequences of the neurocognitive profiles reported in the literature are still unclear and may vary across populations. Deficits are suspected to influence the association between MDD and neurodegenerative disorders and could thus be of particular clinical consequence. The aim of this review is to describe the clinical neuropsychological profile in MDD and how it is related to research during the past decade on cognitive deficits in MDD from a state, trait, and scar perspective. This review, with a clinical perspective, investigates research from the past decade regarding cognitive functioning in MDD in a long-term perspective. We focus on the clinical manifestation of deficits, and the potential neurodegenerative consequences of the neurocognitive profile in MDD. Searches in Medline, PsycINFO and Embase were conducted targeting articles published between 2010 and 2020. Examination of the evidence for long-lasting neurocognitive deficits in major depression within the cognitive domains of Memory, Executive Functions, Attention, and Processing Speed was conducted and was interpreted in the context of the State, Scar and Trait hypotheses. Defining the neurocognitive profiles in MDD will have consequences for personalized evaluation and treatment of residual cognitive symptoms, and etiological understanding of mood disorders, and treatments could potentially reduce or delay the development of neurodegenerative disorders.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyt.2022.764374

Cites

101 of 101 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hammar, Å., Ronold, E. H., & Rekkedal, G. Å.
Affiliations
Haukeland University Hospital (NO)
Corresponding author
Hammar, Åsa
Venue
Frontiers in Psychiatry
Published
2022-03-08
Volume
13
Pages
764374-764374
ISSN
1664-0640 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4221105397
Cited by
132
References
101
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 8 · 2020: 1
FWCI
3.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Universitetet i Bergen
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
major depressive disorder, cognitive impairment, neuropsychological profile, memory impairment, executive function, attention deficits, processing speed, neurodegeneration, mood disorders

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