SynthesisPsychological medicine2025
The impact of patient choice on uptake, adherence, and outcomes across depression, anxiety, and eating disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Psychological medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Consensus-based clinical and research recommendations for use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the context of eating disorders: a modified Delphi study.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2026Article
- Shared decision-making in depression: From a generalized ethical imperative to a personalized approach? A narrative review.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2026Review
- Patient-Provider Matching, Engagement, and Outcomes of a Digital Mental Health Treatment Platform: Real-World Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- What if I needed help? Population preferences for first-line mental health treatments in the post-COVID time.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing evidence highlights the critical role of patient choice of treatment, with significant benefits for outcomes found in some studies. While four meta-analyses have previously examined the association between treatment choice and outcomes in mental health, robust conclusions have been limited by the inclusion of studies with biased preference trial designs. The current systematic review included 30 studies across three common and frequently comorbid mental health disorders (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.