ArticleBMC psychiatry2026
Latent profiles and network analysis of adolescent depression and cognitive impairment.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdolescence is a critical period for rapid emotional and cognitive development. Depression and cognitive impairment frequently co-occur in this population, yet their comorbidity patterns and symptom-level interactions remain insufficiently explored.
methodsA total of 2,244 students (mean age = 16.8 ± 0.84 years; 1,218 males, 1,026 females) from a high school in Heilongjiang Province, China, were recruited. Depressive symptoms and cognitive impairment were assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) and the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire–Depression (PDQ-D). Latent profile analysis (LPA) was applied to identify subgroups, followed by network analysis to examine central symptoms (expected influence, EI), bridge symptoms (bridge expected influence, BEI), and network differences (NCT).
resultsThe optimal LPA model identified three comorbidity subgroups: low, moderate, and high. NCT revealed significant differences in network structure and global strength between the low–moderate (S = 1.514, P < 0.001) and moderate–high groups (S = 1.324, P < 0.001), whereas no differences were found between the low–high groups. Somatic symptoms were the most central nodes across networks. Prospective memory impairment and interpersonal problems were stable bridges, while inhibition/organization deficits uniquely bridged domains in the moderate subgroup.
conclusionsAdolescent Depression and Cognitive Impairment can be classified into low, moderate, and high comorbidity subgroups. Somatic symptoms emerged as the central symptom, while prospective memory impairment and interpersonal problems were identified as key bridge symptoms, suggesting potential intervention targets for early screening and stratified treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.