MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388014707 · doi:10.1111/acps.13631

Outcomes of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with depressive symptoms with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2023· review· en· W4388014707 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Stefano Ferrea, Georgios Petrides, Yamina Ehrt‐Schäfer, Jules Angst, Erich Seifritz, Sebastian Olbrich, Georgios Schoretsanitis

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHLS TherapeuticsServierUniversità degli Studi di VeronaH. Lundbeck A/SUppsala UniversitetUniversity of TorontoUniversity of BernCilagPennsylvania State UniversitySunovionUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsPersonality disordersBig Five personality traitsInternal medicineMeta-analysisElectroconvulsive therapyPersonalityComorbidityMajor depressive disorderMedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims To assess electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) outcomes in patients affected by depressive symptoms with versus without additional comorbid personality disorders/traits. Methods We identified observational studies investigating ECT clinical outcomes in patients affected by depressive symptoms with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits in Embase/Medline in 11/2022. Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023390833). Study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle‐Ottawa‐Scale. Our primary outcomes were ECT response and remission rates. Meta‐regression analyses included effects of in/outpatient percentages, age, number of ECT sessions, and electrode placement; subgroup analyses included the assessment methods for personality disorders/traits. We performed sensitivity analyses after excluding poor‐quality studies. Results A total of 20 studies ( n = 11,390) were included in our analysis. Patients with comorbid personality disorders/traits had lower remission rates (OR = 0.42, 95% CI = 0.31, 0.58, p < 0.001) with substantial heterogeneity ( I 2 = 93.0%) as well as lower response rates (OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.24, 0.51, n = 5129, p < 0.001) with substantial heterogeneity ( I 2 = 93.0%) compared with patients without comorbid personality disorders/traits. Relapse rates were higher in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 3.23, 95% CI = 1.40, 7.45, k = 4, n = 239, p = 0.006) with moderate heterogeneity ( I 2 = 75.0%) and post‐ECT memory impairment was more frequent in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 1.41, 95% CI = 1.36, 1.46, k = 4, n = 471, p < 0.001) with minimal heterogeneity ( I 2 = 0.0%). Dropout rates were higher in patients with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits (OR = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.13, 2.21, k = 3, n = 6145, p = 0.008). Conclusions Patients with comorbid personality disorders/traits treated with ECT are reported to have lower response and remission rates and higher rates of side effects and relapse rates compared with patients without personality disorders/traits.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Psychiatrica ScandinavicaSame topicElectroconvulsive Therapy StudiesFrench-language works237,207