ArticleJournal of affective disorders2016
Testing for clinical inertia in medication treatment of bipolar disorder.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and predictors of physician recommendations for medication adjustment in bipolar disorder treatment.Journal of affective disorders · 2018Trial
- Bipolar disorder measurement-based care: Two-phase trial in primary care.General hospital psychiatryTrial
- When Doing Nothing Feels Safer: A Multilevel Framework for Therapeutic Inertia in Psychiatry.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Measurement-Based Care for Bipolar Disorder: Symptoms and Treatment Changes.The primary care companion for CNS disorders · 2026Article
- The Patient Mania Questionnaire (PMQ-9): a Brief Scale for Assessing and Monitoring Manic Symptoms.Journal of general internal medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical inertia has been defined as lack of change in medication treatment at visits where a medication adjustment appears to be indicated. This paper seeks to identify the extent of clinical inertia in medication treatment of bipolar disorder. A second goal is to identify patient characteristics that predict this treatment pattern.
methodData describe 23,406 visits made by 1815 patients treated for bipolar disorder during the STEP-BD practical clinical trial. Visits were classified in terms of whether a medication adjustment appears to be indicated, and also whether or not one occurred. Multivariable regression analyses were conducted to find which patient characteristics were predictive of whether adjustment occurred.
results36% of visits showed at least 1 indication for adjustment. The most common indications were non-response to medication, side effects, and start of a new illness episode. Among visits with an indication for adjustment, no adjustment occurred 19% of the time, which may be suggestive of clinical inertia. In multivariable models, presence of any indication for medication adjustment was a predictor of receiving one (OR=1.125, 95% CI =1.015, 1.246), although not as strong as clinical status measures. LIMITATIONS: The associations observed are not necessarily causal, given the study design. The data also lack information about physician-patient communication.
conclusionsMany patients remained on the same medication regimen despite indications of side effects or non-response to treatment. Although lack of adjustment does not necessarily reflect clinical inertia in all cases, the reasons for this treatment pattern merit further examination.
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.