this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2023
35 points (100.0% liked)

Science

13009 readers
8 users here now

Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
Gaywallet@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org
35
A subtype of depression identified (www.sciencedaily.com)
submitted 1 year ago by badbrainstorm@lemmy.ml to c/science@beehaw.org
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/1491937

Using surveys, cognitive tests and brain imaging, researchers have identified a type of depression that affects about a quarter of patients. The goal is to diagnose and treat the condition more precisely.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Leafeytea@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would be curious to know more about the age of the participants in the sample and if they cross assessed for other cognitive issues before this study began. 1000 people is statistically pretty small, and there can be many other factors contributing to depressive presentation, particularly if there is cognitive decline already occurring due to issues such as MCI or an (as yet) non-diagnosed dementia of some type. Major depression is commonly present in patients with brain illness, which can further complicate and delay correct treatment and diagnosis for both conditions.

[–] Velonie@beehaw.org 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

1000 is not small at all and with a properly designed study it's more than enough for statistical significance

[–] Leafeytea@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I was thinking of the sample in relation to the population being studied. There are reportedly over 21 million people in the US diagnosed with depression. 1000 people is representative of less than 0.005% of that group.

[–] Velonie@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yes, I'm aware. Sample sizes to get a 95% confidence interval are significantly smaller in most cases than the average person thinks. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_size_determination and the section on required sample size for hypotheses tests. There's even sample size calculators online you can find that'll spit this number for a 95% CI out for you. Personally I think given that information, it's pretty unlikely the author made that error in a peer reviewed paper where reviewers are certainly aware as well

[–] Umbrias@beehaw.org 3 points 1 year ago

Just wait until people hear about all the medical studies with sample size goals of twelve, considered an adequate sample size for medical procedure studies and medical device studies.

[–] Leafeytea@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thanks. :) My curiosity about the other factors remains. Perhaps they will add more information about this next time.

[–] Velonie@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, that's totally fair to question. I mentioned above, but it depends on sample selection and study design moreso than the actual number 👍