Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27536079›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2016

Comparison between neurostimulation techniques repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation vs electroconvulsive therapy for the treatment of resistant depression: patient preference and cost-effectiveness.

Racheli Magnezi, Emanuel Aminov, Dikla Shmuel, Merav Dreifuss, Pinhas Dannon

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06682299 (Transitioning From Maintenance ECT to Maintenance TMS in Treatment Resistant Depression), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

NCT06682299 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Transitioning From Maintenance ECT to Maintenance TMS in Treatment Resistant Depression

TypeinterventionalSponsorAustin MessnerRan2025 to 2025Enrolled1ConditionsTreatment Resistant Depression (TRD)ArmsTransmagnetic Stimulation, Electroconvulsive Therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

5 authors.

Racheli MagneziPublic Health and Health Systems Management Program, Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan.
Emanuel AminovPublic Health and Health Systems Management Program, Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan.
Dikla ShmuelBeer Yaakov Mental Health Center affiliated to Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Merav DreifussPublic Health and Health Systems Management Program, Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan.
Pinhas DannonPublic Health and Health Systems Management Program, Department of Management, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan; Beer Yaakov Mental Health Center affiliated to Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a common disorder, widely distributed in the population, and is often associated with severe symptoms and functional impairment. It has been estimated that 30% of MDD patients do not benefit adequately from therapeutic interventions, including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is generally defined as a failure to achieve remission, despite therapeutic interventions.

aimThe most effective treatment alternatives for TRD are hospitalization, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Here we compared the clinical effectiveness of ECT and TMS, including success rates, patient responses, side-effect profiles, and financial worthiness.

resultsWe found that ECT (P<0.0001) was more effective than TMS (P<0.012) (not statistically significant in group effect) in TRD patients. However, ECT patients reported a higher percentage of side effects (P<0.01) and the TMS treatment scored better in terms of patient preference. The cost benefit of ECT was higher than that of TMS (US$2075 vs US$814). Patient's preferences for treatment could be more intense in the TMS, if the TMS is included in the Health Maintenance Organization's service list.

conclusionWe propose that both of these treatment options should be available in psychiatric wards, thus expanding the therapeutic toolkit for TRD.

Indexed as

cost benefitECTpatient preferenceTMStreatment-resistant depression

Identifiers

PMID27536079
PMCPMC4977067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.