Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30074951›Full record

ArticleMedical care2018

MoodNetwork: An Innovative Approach to Patient-centered Research.

Louisa G Sylvia, Casey M Hearing, Rebecca E Montana, Alexandra K Gold, Samantha L Walsh, Jessica A Janos, Roberta E Tovey, Thilo Deckersbach, Andrew A Nierenberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Ensuring patient and public involvement in the transition to AI-assisted mental health care: A systematic scoping review and agenda for design justice.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Expanding Access to Cancer Clinical Trials for Patients With Mental Illness.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2019
    Article
  9. 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

9 authors.

Louisa G SylviaMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Casey M HearingMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Rebecca E MontanaMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Alexandra K GoldMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Samantha L WalshMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Jessica A JanosMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Roberta E ToveyMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Thilo DeckersbachMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.
Andrew A NierenbergMassachusetts General Hospital, Bipolar Clinic and Research Program.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionResearch has often been viewed as a passive process by which participants enroll in studies developed by researchers. It is becoming clearer that to understand the nuances of mood episodes and how to prevent them, we need to conduct large clinical trials that have the power to investigate moderators and mediators, or catalysts and mechanisms of change. MoodNetwork, the first online, patient-centered research community for individuals with mood disorders, aims to change the way that traditional research has been conducted by involving patients, their caregivers, and advocates in the process of research. The aim of this report is to share lessons learned from developing MoodNetwork.

methodsParticipants enroll by completing a demographic survey and consent form. Once enrolled, participants are encouraged to complete optional surveys about their mood disorders and areas of research priority. Stakeholder and advocacy partners developed the website, web-based surveys, and recruitment materials.

resultsMoodNetwork has enrolled 4103 participants to date. Of this sample, 96.9% report experiencing depression and 79.7% endorse symptoms of mania or hypomania. Participants rated reducing stigma and alleviating symptoms as their 2 largest research priorities. Recruitment has been slower than expected. Recruiting a diverse sample has been challenging, and this impacts the Network's ability to conduct comparative effectiveness research studies. DISCUSSION: We discuss lessons learned from recruiting individuals with mood disorders to MoodNetwork, an innovative approach to conducting clinical trials. We identify and review 5 strategies for increasing enrollment as well as future directions.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentSocial NetworkingCommunity-Institutional RelationsComparative Effectiveness ResearchHumansMood DisordersPatient-Centered CarePatient ParticipationResearch DesignUnited States

Identifiers

PMID30074951
PMCPMC6143208

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.