Psychiatric Comorbidities and Treatment Modalities in Children With Osteogenesis Imperfecta: A Systematic Review of Mental Health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To evaluate the prevalence of psychiatric signs and symptoms and describe psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological interventions among children with osteogenesis imperfecta (OI). PRISMA guidelines were followed, and the study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024588284). Studies (n = 1419) were identified across five databases. Eligible studies, identified by independent reviewers, included peer-reviewed research on psychiatric comorbidities or interventions in children with OI. Data extraction included study design, population characteristics, mental health outcomes, and treatment effectiveness, with all studies assessed for quality and bias. Findings were synthesized to evaluate the prevalence of psychiatric comorbidities and intervention effectiveness. Five articles met inclusion criteria after screening and full-text review. Although the included studies varied in design and outcome measures, they reported elevated signs and symptoms of anxiety and depression in children with OI, particularly those with severe phenotypes. Qualitative findings highlighted subclinical psychosocial burdens, including emotional distress and social isolation. No studies evaluated psychotherapeutic or psychopharmacological interventions. This systematic review provides the first comprehensive analysis of psychiatric comorbidities in children with OI, revealing a critical lack of research on psychiatric comorbidities in children with OI. These gaps highlight an urgent need for targeted mental health studies to inform screening and integrated care for this population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".