↓ Skip to main content

Neural and Behavioral Predictors of Treatment Efficacy on Mood Symptoms and Cognition in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Neural and Behavioral Predictors of Treatment Efficacy on Mood Symptoms and Cognition in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00337
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ida Seeberg, Hanne L. Kjaerstad, Kamilla W. Miskowiak

Abstract

Background: The clinical and etiological heterogeneity of mood disorders impede identification of effective treatments for the individual patient. This highlights a need for early neuronal and behavioral biomarkers for treatment efficacy, which can provide a basis for more personalized treatments. The present systematic review aimed to identify the most consistent neuronal and behavioral predictors of treatment efficacy on mood symptoms and cognitive impairment in mood disorders. Methods: We identified and included 60 original peer-reviewed studies investigating neuroimaging and behavioral predictors of treatment efficacy within the domains of emotional and non-emotional cognition, structural neuroimaging, and resting state functional connectivity in patients with unipolar or bipolar disorder. Results: Lower baseline responsivity in limbic regions coupled with heightened medial and dorsal prefrontal responses to emotional stimuli were the most consistent predictors of response to pharmacotherapy for depression. In contrast, heightened limbic and ventral prefrontal reactivity to emotional stimuli seemed to predict efficacy of psychological interventions. Early modulation of fronto-limbic activity and reduction in negative bias were also associated with treatment response. Better performance on non-emotional tests at baseline was relatively consistently associated with efficacy on mood symptoms, whereas the association between neural activity during non-emotional tests and treatment response was less clear. Other baseline factors associated with treatment response were greater white matter integrity, resting state functional connectivity, more prefrontal gray matter volume as well as an early increase following short administered treatment. Finally, emerging evidence indicates that baseline cognitive deficits are associated with greater chances of achieving treatment efficacy on cognition. Conclusions: Patients' profile of emotional and non-emotional cognition and neural activity-and the early treatment-associated changes in neural and cognitive function-may be useful for guiding treatments for depression. While cognitive deficits at baseline seem to improve chances of treatment efficacy on cognition, more studies of this association are urgently needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Other 6 8%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 18%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 23 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,135,105
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#4,409
of 10,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,591
of 330,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#116
of 175 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,323 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 175 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.