Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25733951›Full record

ReviewDialogues in clinical neuroscience2014

Prediction of treatment outcomes in psychiatry--where do we stand ?

Francis J McMahon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Neuromarkers in addiction: definitions, development strategies, and recent advances.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Francis J McMahonInternational Society of Psychiatric Genetics, Brentwood, Tennessee, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Human Genetics Branch, National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Genetic Determinants of Antidepressant Response in the STAR*D CohortZIAMH002844 · NIMH · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH · PI MCMAHON, FRANCIS J · 2009 to 2025
$11.1M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychiatric treatment relies on a solid armamentarium of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment modalities that perform reasonably well for many patients but leave others in a state of chronic disability or troubled by problematic side effects. Treatment planning in psychiatry remains an art that depends on considerable trial and error. Thus, there is an urgent need for better tools that will provide a means for matching individual patients with the most effective treatments while minimizing the risk of adverse events. This review will consider the current state of the science in predicting treatment outcomes in psychiatry. Genetic and other biomarkers will be considered alongside clinical diagnostic, and family history data. Problems inherent in prediction medicine will also be discussed, along with recent developments that support the hope that psychiatry can do a better job in quickly identifying the best treatments for each patient.

Indexed as

Precision MedicinePsychiatryHumansMental DisordersPharmacogeneticsadverse eventbiomarkerpersonalized medicinepharmacogenetics

Identifiers

PMID25733951
PMCPMC4336916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.