ArticleJAACAP open2023
Systematic Review: White Matter Microstructural Organization in Adolescents With Depression.
Article in JAACAP open, 2023. 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.
- Structural network alterations in adolescent major depression and bipolar disorder: a graph-theoretical and fixel-based analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2026Article
- Demyelination and Cognitive Performance in Long COVID Patients with Insomnia and/or Depression.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- White matter functional connectome gradient dysfunction in major depressive disorder.Psychoradiology · 2025Article
- Radiologic evaluation of the uncinate fasciculus using diffusion tensor imaging and tractography: review of technical considerations and clinical implications.Polish journal of radiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: A growing body of literature has focused on the neural mechanisms of depression. Our goal was to conduct a systematic review on the white matter microstructural differences in adolescents with depressive disorders vs adolescents without depressive disorders. Method: We searched PubMed and PsycINFO for publications on August 3, 2022 (original search conducted in July 2021). The review was registered on PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42021268200), and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Eligible studies were original research papers comparing diffusion tensor/spectrum imaging findings in adolescents with vs without depression (originally ages 12-19 years, later expanded to 11-21 years). Studies were excluded if they focused on depression exclusively in the context of another condition, used only dimensional depressive symptom assessment(s), or used the same dataset as another included publication. Results: The search yielded 575 unique records, of which 14 full-text papers were included (824 adolescents with depression and 686 without depression). The following white matter regions showed significant differences in fractional anisotropy in at least 3 studies: uncinate fasciculus, cingulum, anterior corona radiata, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus, and corpus callosum (genu and body). Most studies reported decreased, rather than increased, fractional anisotropy in adolescents with depression. Limitations include the possibility for selective reporting bias and risk of imprecision, given the small sample sizes in some studies. Conclusion: Our systematic review suggests aberrant white matter microstructure in limbic-cortical-striatal-thalamic circuits, and the corpus callosum, in adolescents with depression. Future research should focus on developmental trajectories in depression, identifying sources of heterogeneity and integrating findings across imaging modalities.
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.