ReviewCureus2024
A Comparison of the Efficacy and Adverse Effects of Ketamine and Electroconvulsive Therapy in the Management of Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ketamine has been repeatedly demonstrated to be an effective treatment in the management of patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). An important question is whether it is equally or more effective than the current gold standard of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), as the adverse effects of ECT can lead to memory loss and neurocognitive deficits. A literature search was conducted for trials that directly compared the efficacy and adverse effects of ketamine and ECT via PubMed and Google Scholar. A total of 56 articles were identified with six included in this review. The studies included differed significantly in their quality and with differing levels of potential for bias. Ketamine has a more immediate effect when compared to ECT, but the antidepressant effects are shorter-lasting. Cognitive deficits were less pronounced in patients undergoing ketamine therapy. Many studies had a small number of participants and varied widely in the type of ECT used. Allocation bias seems likely in nonrandomized studies. Follow-up times were also short in some studies. The existing literature does not provide sufficient evidence to support the usage of ketamine over that of ECT for TRD, as remission rates were significantly higher over extended periods in ECT groups. Cognitive adverse effects were more pronounced in patients undergoing ECT. More high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing these two treatment modalities are required before drawing any firm conclusions.
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.