ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2022
Biological Diagnosis of Depression: A Biomarker Panel from Several Nonspecial Indicators Instead of the Specific Biomarker(s).
Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) on pain and depression in cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Trial
- Dual-Selective Terahertz-Nanodisc Metasurfaces for Exploring Neurotransmitter Dynamics beyond Spectral Limitations.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2025Article
- Review
- Cool the Inflamed Brain: A Novel Anti-inflammatory Strategy for the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder.Current neuropharmacology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is a consensus that the diagnosis efficiency of depression is rather low in clinic. The traditional way of diagnosing depression by symptomatology is flawed. Recent years, a growing body of evidence has underlined the importance of physiological indicators in the diagnosis of depression. However, the diagnosis of depression is difficult to be like some common clinical diseases, which have clear physiological indicators. A single physiological index provides limited information to clinicians and is of little help in the diagnosis of depression. Thus, it is more rational and practical to diagnose depression with a biomarker panel, which covers a few non-specific indicators, such as hormones, cytokines, and neurotrophins. This open review suggested that biomarker panel had a bright future in creating a new model of depression diagnosis or at least providing a reference to the existing depression criteria. The viewpoint is also the future of other psychiatric diagnosis.
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.