ArticleBrain and behavior2019
Remediating reduced memory specificity in bipolar disorder: A case study using a Computerized Memory Specificity Training.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impaired Autobiographical Memory Flexibility in Iranian Trauma Survivors With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2021Article
- Remediating reduced memory specificity in bipolar disorder: A case study using a Computerized Memory Specificity Training.Brain and behavior · 2019Article
- Assessment of memory deficits in psychiatric disorders: A systematic literature review.Journal of neurosciences in rural practiceReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesReduced autobiographical memory specificity (rAMS) is a vulnerability factor found across unipolar depression (UD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), eating disorder, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder (BD). A group delivered psychological therapy training called Memory Specificity Training (MeST) remediates rAMS in UD and PTSD, with additional downstream effects on related psychological processes and symptoms. Its impact in BD is unknown. In this case study, we examined the impact of a computerized version of MeST (c-MeST) on improving AMS and related symptoms and processes in participant with rapid cycling type I BD.
methodAn experimental case study with an ABA design was used. During baseline (14 days, Phase A), the training phase (nine sessions across 17 days, Phase B), and a 1-month follow-up (Phase A), memory specificity, depressive symptoms, and related processes and symptoms were repeatedly measured.
resultsMemory specificity increased significantly after the participant completed c-MeST. Session-to-session scores indicated that AMS improved most from the in-person baseline assessment to the first online session. All other measures of processes and symptoms deteriorated during the training phase but regressed to baseline during follow-up.
conclusionMemory specificity was improved as indicated by increased AMS from pre-intervention measurement to 1-month follow-up. Other improvements in symptoms were not observed. Rather, some related maladaptive psychological processes and symptoms worsened during the training phase and regressed to baseline during follow-up.
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.