ArticleIndustrial psychiatry journal
Comparative change in P300 indices following antidepressant treatment in patients with major depressive disorder.
Article in Industrial psychiatry journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of Cognitive Function With Event-Related Potentials and Immune Inflammation in Adolescents With Major Depressive Disorder.Brain and behavior · 2026Article
- Differences in Children and Adolescents with Depression before and after a Remediation Program: An Event-Related Potential Study.Brain sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Cognitive disturbance is seen in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Event-related potential can assist in measuring the neurocognition, and P300 is the most commonly used noninvasive electrophysiological parameter for measuring cognition. Aims: The aim of this study is to assess the baseline P300 parameters, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores and compare them with their levels after 3 months of antidepressant therapy. Settings and Design: a longitudinal study was done on total 24 diagnosed cases of major depression who underwent P300, HAM-D, and MADRS assessment in the gap of 3 months before and after starting antidepressant therapy. Subjects and Methods: Newly diagnosed cases of MDD patients were assessed using HAM-D and MADRS for severity rating. P300 assessment was also carried out with auditory oddball paradigm using Nihon Kohden NCV-SMG-EP system. The assessments were repeated after 3 months of antidepressant treatment. Statistical Analysis Used: The Wilcoxon test was used to compare mean values of P300 parameters, HAM-D, and MADRS score. Spearman correlation analysis was done to study the association between various parameters of P300 and HAM-D and MADRS score before and after treatment of 3 months of antidepressant therapy. Results: Significant difference is shown in various parameters P300 except for A11-P300 amplitude and A31-P300 amplitude. A significant difference was shown in HAM-D and MADRS scores. No significant correlation was seen between other P300 parameters and HAM-D and MADRS scale before as well as after antidepressant therapy. Conclusions: P300 may be used as an index to evaluate the response to antidepressant treatment in patients with MDD.
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.