Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38510303›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

Linguistic markers for major depressive disorder: a cross-sectional study using an automated procedure.

Raluca Nicoleta Trifu, Bogdan Nemeș, Dana Cristina Herta, Carolina Bodea-Hategan, Dorina Anca Talaș, Horia Coman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
13.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Disorganisation and depression: a re-examination of how we think and speak when depressed.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. First-person pronouns as linguistic markers of depression among Brazilian youths.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999) · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Raluca Nicoleta TrifuDepartment of Neurosciences, Discipline of Medical Psychology and Psychiatry, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Bogdan NemeșDepartment of Neurosciences, Discipline of Medical Psychology and Psychiatry, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Dana Cristina HertaDepartment of Neurosciences, Discipline of Medical Psychology and Psychiatry, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Carolina Bodea-HateganSpecial Education Department, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Dorina Anca TalașSpecial Education Department, Faculty of Psychology and Education Sciences, Babeș-Bolyai University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Horia ComanDepartment of Neurosciences, Discipline of Medical Psychology and Psychiatry, Iuliu Haţieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy · ROBabeș-Bolyai University · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The identification of language markers, referring to both form and content, for common mental health disorders such as major depressive disorder (MDD), can facilitate the development of innovative tools for early recognition and prevention. However, studies in this direction are only at the beginning and are difficult to implement due to linguistic variability and the influence of cultural contexts. Aim: This study aims to identify language markers specific to MDD through an automated analysis process based on RO-2015 LIWC (Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count). Materials and methods: A sample of 62 medicated patients with MDD and a sample of 43 controls were assessed. Each participant provided language samples that described something that was pleasant for them. Assessment tools: (1) Screening tests for MDD (MADRS and DASS-21); (2) Ro-LIWC2015 - Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count - a computerized text analysis software, validated for Romanian Language, that analyzes morphology, syntax and semantics of word use. Results: Depressive patients use different approaches in sentence structure, and communicate in short sentences. This requires multiple use of the punctuation mark period, which implicitly requires directive communication, limited in exchange of ideas. Also, participants from the sample with depression mostly use impersonal pronouns, first person pronoun in plural form - not singular, a limited number of prepositions and an increased number of conjunctions, auxiliary verbs, negations, verbs in the past tense, and much less in the present tense, increased use of words expressing negative affects, anxiety, with limited use of words indicating positive affects. The favorite topics of interest of patients with depression are leisure, time and money. Conclusion: Depressive patients use a significantly different language pattern than people without mood or behavioral disorders, both in form and content. These differences are sometimes associated with years of education and sex, and might also be explained by cultural differences.

Indexed as

automated analysis procedurecultural differenceslinguistic markersLIWCmajor depressive disorder

Identifiers

PMID38510303
PMCPMC10953917
OpenAlexW4392504912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.