MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402611833 · doi:10.1016/j.jad.2024.09.081

Electroencephalography (EEG) spectral signatures of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) and vortioxetine in major depressive disorder: A systematic review

2024· review· en· W4402611833 on OpenAlexaff
Gia Han Le, Sabrina Wong, Shreya Vasudeva, Hartej Gill, Sebastian Badulescu, Daylen Rodriguez Portelles, Yang Jing Zheng, Kayla M. Teopiz, Shakila Meshkat, Angela T.H. Kwan, Roger Ho, Taeho Greg Rhee, Joshua D. Rosenblat, Rodrigo B. Mansur, Roger S. McIntyre

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Affective Disorders · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkBrain and Cognition Discovery Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVortioxetineElectroencephalographyReuptake inhibitorNorepinephrineReuptakeSerotonin Uptake InhibitorsNorepinephrine transporterMajor depressive disorderSerotoninAntidepressantPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicineInternal medicineDopamineAmygdalaFluoxetineReceptorHippocampus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Converging evidence suggests electroencephalography (EEG) methods may elucidate alterations in global structural and functional connectivity that underlie the pathophysiology of depressive disorders. Extant literature suggests SSRIs and SNRIs may broadly induce alterations to EEG-measured neural activity. Herein, this systematic review comprehensively evaluates changes to EEG spectral signatures associated with vortioxetine and each FDA-approved agent within the SSRI and SNRI class. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of studies investigating changes to EEG spectral signatures associated with SSRI, SNRI, and/or vortioxetine treatment in persons with MDD. Database search occurred from database inception to May 3, 2024. RESULTS: Our search yielded 15 studies investigating overall spectral signature changes associated with SSRI- and/or SNRI-treatment. The existing literature presents with mixed findings. Notwithstanding, we did observe a pattern in which the SSRI and SNRI agents reproducibly affect EEG spectral signatures. We observed overlapping yet distinct spectral patterns for each agent within- and between-drug classes of SSRIs and SNRIs. Changes in resting/wake EEG were also observed. LIMITATIONS: The findings from our systematic review are mixed. Heterogeneity exists with sample size, composition, dosing of antidepressants, duration of antidepressant exposure, as well as the type of EEG devices used. DISCUSSIONS: Our findings provide support to the notion that although SSRIs, SNRIs and vortioxetine block reuptake of the serotonin transporter; they are different in their profile of pharmacology as evidenced by differential EEG signatures. EEG changes associated with SSRIs, SNRIs and vortioxetine are also highly replicated findings across mixed studies and populations.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.270 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Affective DisordersSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207