Outcomes of electroconvulsive therapy in patients with depressive symptoms with versus without comorbid personality disorders/traits: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".