ArticlePloS one2014
Guidelines disconcordance in acute bipolar depression: data from the national Bipolar Mania Pathway Survey (BIPAS) in mainland China.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of quetiapine extended release monotherapy in bipolar depression: a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.Psychopharmacology · 2016Trial
- Clinical distinctions in symptomatology and psychiatric comorbidities between misdiagnosed bipolar I and bipolar II disorder versus major depressive disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Clinical Guideline (CANMAT 2016) Discordance of Medications for Patients with Major Depressive Disorder in China.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2023Article
- Concordance of the treatment patterns for major depressive disorders between the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) algorithm and real-world practice in China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- A nationwide study on concordance with multimodal treatment guidelines in bipolar disorder.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2018Article
- A medication assessment tool to evaluate prescribers' adherence to evidence-based guidelines in bipolar disorder.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the recent attention to the importance of evidence-based medicine in psychiatry, a number of treatment guidelines have been published. This survey investigated prescribing pattern and predictors for guideline disconcordance in the acute treatment of bipolar depression across mainland China. Pharmacological treatments of 1078 patients with bipolar depression were examined. Guidelines disconcordance was determined by comparing the medication(s) patients were prescribed with the recommendation(s) in the guidelines of the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments. Predictors for guidelines discordance were analyzed with logistic regression. Of the 1078 patients, 50.2% patients were treated against treatment guidelines recommendations. The patients who were treated in general hospitals (OR = 1.53, 95% CI 1.18-1.97), with a depressive episode (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.19) and an older age at first onset (OR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.15-2.28) were more likely to receive guideline-disconcordant treatment than their counterparts. In contrast, the patients with current mental comorbidity, an older age at study entry, a longer duration of disease, and more frequent episodes in past year were less likely to receive guideline-disconcordant treatments than their counterparts with an OR of 0.43 (95% CI 0.24-0.77), 0.52 (95CI% 0.36-0.75), 0.48 (95% CI 0.36-0.65), and 0.50 (95% CI 0.38-0.64), respectively. Our finding suggested the disconcordance with treatment guidelines in patients with an acute bipolar depression is common under naturalistic conditions in mainland China, and the predicting factors correlated with guidelines disconcordance include both psychiatrist-specific (clinicians from general hospitals) and patient-specific features (a depressive episode at first onset, no current co-morbidity with mental disorders, a younger age at study entry, an older age at first onset, shorter duration of disease, and non-frequent episodes in past year).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.