Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30776777›Full record

Trial reportNeuroImage. Clinical2019

Segregation of salience network predicts treatment response of depression to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Jie Fan, Ivy F Tso, Daniel F Maixner, Tessa Abagis, Luis Hernandez-Garcia, Stephan F Taylor

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Breakthroughs and challenges for generating brain network-based biomarkers of treatment response in depression.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jie FanMedical Psychological Center, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China; Medical Psychological Institute of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Ivy F TsoDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Daniel F MaixnerDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Tessa AbagisDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Luis Hernandez-GarciafMRI Laboratory, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Stephan F TaylorDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: sftaylor@umich.edu.
University of Michigan · USCentral South University · CN

Funding

Neural mechanisms of eye gaze perception in schizophreniaK23MH108823 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI TSO, IVY FEI · 2016 to 2020
$894k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH108823
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe present study tested the hypothesis that network segregation, a graph theoretic measure of functional organization of the brain, is correlated with treatment response in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) undergoing repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS).

methodsNetwork segregation, calculated from resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging scans, was measured in 32 patients with MDD who entered a sham-controlled, double-blinded, randomized trial of rTMS to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, and a cohort of 20 healthy controls (HCs). Half of the MDD patients received sham treatment in the blinded phase, followed by active rTMS in the open-label phase. The analyses focused on segregation of the following networks: default mode (DMN), salience (SN), fronto-parietal (FPN), cingulo-opercular (CON), and memory retrieval (MRN).

resultsThere was no differential change in network segregation comparing sham to active treatment. However, in the combined group of patients who completed active rTMS treatment (in the blinded plus open-label phases), higher baseline segregation of SN significantly predicted more symptom improvement after rTMS. Compared to HCs at baseline, MDD patients showed decreased segregation in DMN, and trend-level decreases in SN and MRN.

conclusionThe results highlight the importance of network segregation in MDD, particularly in the SN, where more normal baseline segregation of SN may predict better treatment response to rTMS in depression.

Indexed as

AdultBrainDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetTranscranial Magnetic StimulationDefault mode networkDepressionRepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulationSalience networkSegregation

Identifiers

PMID30776777
PMCPMC6378906
OpenAlexW2914666731

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.