Cognitive reactivity compared to other risk factors in the prediction of depressive episodes over two and nine years: a longitudinal cohort study

Cognitive reactivity, self-depressed associations, and the recurrence of depression

BackgroundMindfulness‐based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is effective for relapse prevention in major depressive disorder (MDD). It reduces cognitive reactivity (CR) and rumination, and enhances self‐compassion and mindfulness. Although rumination and mindfulness after MBCT are associated with relapse, the association of CR, rumination, self‐compassion, and mindfulness with relapse before initiation of MBCT has never been investigated.MethodsData were drawn from two randomized controlled trials, including a total of 282 remitted MDD participants (≥3 depressive episodes) who had been using maintenance antidepressant medication (mADM) for at least 6 months before baseline. All participants were offered MBCT while either their mADM was maintained or discontinued after MBCT. CR, rumination, self‐compassion, and mindfulness were assessed at baseline by self‐rated questionnaires and were used in Cox proportional hazards regression models to investigate their association with relapse.ResultsCR and mindfulness were associated with relapse, independent of residual symptoms, previous depressive episodes, and mADM‐use. Higher CR and lower mindfulness increased the risk of relapse. Self‐compassion was not associated with relapse. For rumination, a significant interaction with mADM‐use was found. Rumination was associated with relapse in patients who discontinued their mADM, while this effect was absent if patients continued mADM.ConclusionsThese results show that CR, rumination, and mindfulness are associated with relapse in remitted MDD‐patients before initiation of MBCT, independent of residual symptoms and previous depressive episodes. This information could improve decisions in treatment planning in remitted individuals with a history of depression.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a burdensome disease that has a high risk of relapse/recurrence. Cognitive reactivity appears to be a risk factor for relapse. It remains unclear, however, whether dysfunctional cognitions alone or the reactivity of such cognitions to mild states of sadness (ie, cognitive reactivity) is the crucial factor that increases relapse risk. We aimed to assess the long-term predictive value of cognitive reactivity versus dysfunctional cognitions and other risk factors for depressive relapse. In a prospective cohort of outpatients (N = 116; studied between 2000-2005) who had experienced ≥ 2 previous major depressive episodes (MDEs) and were in remission (DSM-IV) at the start of follow-up, we measured cognitive reactivity, with the Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity (LEIDS), and dysfunctional cognitions, with the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale, simultaneously. Course of illness (with the primary outcome of MDE assessed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Axis I Disorders Patient Edition) and time to relapse were monitored prospectively for 3.5 years. Cognitive reactivity scores were associated with time to relapse over the 3.5-year follow-up and also when corrected for the number of previous MDEs and concurrent depressive symptoms (hazard ratio for 1 standard deviation [(HR(SD)); 20 points of the LEIDS, measuring cognitive reactivity] = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.04-2.09; P = .031). Rumination appeared to be a particularly strong predictor of relapse (HR(SD) = 1.60; 95% CI, 1.13-2.26; P = .007). Dysfunctional cognitions did not predict relapse over 3.5 years (HR(SD) = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.74-1.37; P = .93). Every 20-point increase on the cognitive reactivity scale resulted in a 10% to 15% increase in risk of relapse (corrected for previous MDEs and concurrent depressive symptoms). Cognitive reactivity--and particularly rumination--is a long-term predictor of relapse. Future research should address whether psychological interventions can improve cognitive reactivity scores and thereby prevent depressive relapses. ISRCTN Identifier: 68246470.

The association of omega-3 fatty acid levels with personality and cognitive reactivity

This study focused on patients in the general population whose anxiety or depressive disorder is untreated. It explored reasons for not receiving treatment and compared four groups of patients-three that did not receive treatment for different reasons (no problem perceived, no perceived need for care, and unmet need for care) and one that received treatment-regarding their predisposing, enabling, and need factors. Cross-sectional data were used for 743 primary care patients with current anxiety or depressive disorder from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Diagnoses were confirmed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Patients' perception of the presence of a mental problem, perceived need for care, service utilization, and reasons for not receiving treatment were assessed with the Perceived Need for Care Questionnaire. Forty-three percent of the respondents with a six-month anxiety or depression diagnosis did not receive treatment. Twenty-one percent of all respondents with depression or anxiety expressed a need for care but did not receive any. Preferring to manage the problem themselves was the most common reason for respondents to avoid seeking treatment. There were no significant differences in clinical need factors between treated patients and untreated patients with a perceived need for care. Compared with patients in the other two untreated groups, untreated patients with a perceived need for care were more hindered in regard to symptom severity, functional disability, and psychosocial functioning. General practitioners should pay considerable attention to patients whose need for care is unmet. Furthermore, findings support the implementation of patient empowerment in mental health care in order to contribute to easily accessible and patient-centered care.

OBJECTIVES: This study focused on patients in the general population whose anxiety or depressive disorder is untreated. It explored reasons for not receiving treatment and compared four groups of patients—three that did not receive treatment for different reasons (no problem perceived, no perceived need for care, and unmet need for care) and one that received treatment—regarding their predisposing, enabling, and need factors. METHODS: Cross-sectional data were used for 743 primary care patients with current anxiety or depressive disorder from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Diagnoses were confirmed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Patients' perception of the presence of a mental problem, perceived need for care, service utilization, and reasons for not receiving treatment were assessed with the Perceived Need for Care Questionnaire. RESULTS: Forty-three percent of the respondents with a six-month anxiety or depression diagnosis did not receive treatment. Twenty-one percent of all respondents with depression or anxiety expressed a need for care but did not receive any. Preferring to manage the problem themselves was the most common reason for respondents to avoid seeking treatment. There were no significant differences in clinical need factors between treated patients and untreated patients with a perceived need for care. Compared with patients in the other two untreated groups, untreated patients with a perceived need for care were more hindered in regard to symptom severity, functional disability, and psychosocial functioning. CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners should pay considerable attention to patients whose need for care is unmet. Furthermore, findings support the implementation of patient empowerment in mental health care in order to contribute to easily accessible and patient-centered care.

Personality and social support as predictors of first and recurrent episodes of depression

To investigate the effect of childhood life events and childhood trauma on the onset and recurrence of depressive and/or anxiety disorders over a 2-year period in participants without current psychopathology at baseline. Longitudinal data in a large sample of participants without baseline DSM-IV depressive or anxiety disorders (n = 1,167, aged 18 to 65 years; assessed between 2004-2007) were collected in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA). Childhood life events and childhood trauma were assessed at baseline with a semistructured interview. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview, based on DSM-IV criteria, was used to diagnose first onset or recurrent depressive and/or anxiety disorders over a 2-year period. At baseline, 172 participants (14.7%) reported at least 1 childhood life event, and 412 (35.3%) reported any childhood trauma. During 2 years of follow-up, 226 participants (19.4%) developed a new (n = 58) or recurrent (n = 168) episode of a depressive and/or anxiety disorder. Childhood life events did not predict the onset and recurrence of depressive or anxiety disorders. Emotional neglect and psychological, physical, and sexual abuse were all associated with an increased risk of first onset and recurrence of either depressive or comorbid disorders (P < .001), but not of anxiety disorders. In multivariate models, emotional neglect was the only significant independent predictor of first onset and recurrence of any depressive or comorbid disorder (P = .002). These effects were primarily mediated by the severity of (subclinical) depressive symptoms at baseline and, to a lesser extent, by a prior lifetime diagnosis of a depressive and/or anxiety disorder. Childhood maltreatment is a key environmental risk factor, inducing vulnerability to develop new and recurrent depressive and comorbid anxiety and depressive episodes.

Mood induced cognitive and emotional reactivity, life stress, and the prediction of depressive relapse

Cognitive reactivity: Investigation of a potentially treatable marker of suicide risk in depression

Recurrence of major depressive disorder across different treatment settings: Results from the NESDA study

Netherlands study of depression and anxiety (NESDA): examining the long-term course of affective disorders

Unresolved Issues in Longitudinal Telomere Length Research: Response to Susser et al.

Cognitive reactivity to sad mood refers to the degree to which a mild dysphoric state reactivates negative thinking patterns. In this research, the contribution of the history of depression, the length of the current depressive episode and the intensity of the depressive symptoms were assessed in explaining the cognitive reactivity to sad mood measured with the Leiden Index of Depression Sensitivity (LEIDS). The sample consisted of 123 depressed outpatients. The results of principal components analysis suggested a three-factor solution of the LEIDS. The intensity of depressive symptoms, the history of depression and the length of the current depressive episode were all significant in explaining cognitive reactivity to sad mood. We have also found out a significant effect of interaction of the history of depression and the length of the current depressive episode, which demonstrated that a prolonged depression does not induce a stronger cognitive reactivity to sad mood during the relapse of a depressive episode, while during the first depressive episode a longer duration of depression does induce a stronger cognitive reactivity. Such a result demonstrates that the length of the first depressive episode, regardless of its intensity, is crucially important for the formation of cognitive reactivity.

BackgroundUnderstanding the factors influencing cognitive reactivity (CR) may help identify individuals at risk for first episode depression and relapse and facilitate routine access to preventative treatments. However, few studies have examined the relationship between CR and depression in Asian countries. This study was performed to assess the current status of CR among Chinese young adults and explore influencing factors.MethodsA national cross-sectional online study using convenience sampling was conducted among 1597 healthy young adults in China (response rate: 93.94%) with a mean age of 24.34 (SD = 5.76) years.ResultsThe mean CR score was 51.36 ± 18.97 (range 0–130). Binary logistic regression showed that a low level of CR was associated with the following factors: high self-compassion, high social support, high resilience, high monthly household income, and living in a rural area, with odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 0.14 to 0.70. Young adults in full-time employment, experiencing poor sleep, with high neuroticism, who reported frequent sad mood, and who had a high intensity of negative life events had increased CR to depression, with ORs ranging from 1.18 to 6.66. The prediction probability of these factors was 75.40%. Causal relationships among the influencing factors and CR could not be explored.ConclusionsThe self-reported CR levels among Chinese young adults were moderate. Enhancing self-compassion, resilience, and social support for young adults and reducing negative life events, neuroticism, and poor sleep may help decrease CR. These findings may help healthcare providers or researchers determine how to cultivate and improve the CR of young adults by establishing documented policies and/or improving intervention efficacies.