ArticleBMC psychiatry2024
The THINC-it tool: temporal sensitivity to change over time.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 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.
- The association between obstructive sleep apnea and total cerebral small vessel disease burden-Neurovascular insights of OSA.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionCognitive dysfunction is believed to be among the core features of Bipolar Depression(BD-D). However, its evaluation and available treatments are limited. Here, we conducted a longitudinal follow-up clinical trial using the THINC-it tool to evaluate temporal sensitivity to change over time in cognitive function among patients with bipolar depression from a Chinese cohort. It is helpful to verify whether the scale can continuously and reliably measure cognitive function in different time points and reduce the measurement error caused by time factors. Hope our findings could provide insights into the significance of the THINC-it tool as an iterative clinical cognitive evaluation tool.
methodsA total of 120 patients with bipolar depression(40 males and 80 females, respectively) alongside 100 healthy controls(23 males and 77 females, respectively) were recruited in the study. All participants were interviewed for 8 weeks, using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) and the Young Mania Rating Scale(YMRS). The primary dependent measure was the previously validated THINC-it tool, followed by psychometric analysis.
resultsRepeated measures of the THINC-it tool at baseline, one-week, and eight-week periods were conducted after controlling for age, gender, and education effects. Results from the general linear model revealed no significant time differences in variances(P > 0.05). Similarly, adjusting for confounding factors (age, gender, education, and HAMD-17 scores), results from the longitudinal analysis showed that there were no significant differences in cognitive impairment over time(P > 0.05). However, we found significant differences between BD-D and Healthy Control(HC) groups with regards to Spotter, Codebreaker, Trails, Perceived Deficits Questionnaire for Depression-5-items(PDQ-5-D), and THINC-it Total composite(P < 0.05), but not in Symbol Check (p = 0.191).
conclusionThese findings indicate that the THINC-it tool effectively detects sensitivity to change in groups and maintains stability at times, indicating that it is a feasible and reliable instrument for evaluating cognitive dysfunction in Chinese patients with bipolar depression.
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.