ArticleBMJ open2022
Treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) or dysthymic disorder (DD) in spinal cord injury (SCI) patients: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2022. 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.
- Article
- Improving Outcomes in People with Spinal Cord Injury: Encouraging Results from a Multidisciplinary Advanced Rehabilitation Pathway.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAlthough various treatments exist for depression in patients with spinal cord injury (SCI), the comparative effects and relationships between these treatments have not been clearly presented. This study aims to present comprehensive evidence for the treatment of major depressive disorder or dysthymic disorder in patients with SCI by comparing the therapeutic and adverse effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments through a systematic review and network meta-analysis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search for studies in five databases (Medline, Central, Embase, PsycINFO and CHINAL) as well as clinical trial registries (US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov (www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/trialsearch)) and grey literature (Google Scholar). The references of the included studies, previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses will be reviewed. Study selection, data extraction and quality and risk of bias assessments will be independently performed by two authors (JMH and WSC), and disagreements will be resolved by discussion with JHK. Moreover, a Bayesian network meta-analysis will be performed using R software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Our systematic review and network meta-analysis will be performed based on existing studies; thus, we did not seek ethical approval. Our results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at both domestic and international conferences.
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.