ReviewFrontiers in psychiatry2024
A systematic review of structural neuroimaging markers of psychotherapeutic and pharmacological treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Review in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- "It Doesn't Matter Where OCD Comes From," or Does It?Current psychiatry reports · 2026Review
- Burnout and the Brain-A Mechanistic Review of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Identifying individual difference factors associated with treatment response and putative mechanisms of therapeutic change may improve treatment for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Our systematic review of structural neuroimaging markers (i.e., morphometry, structural connectivity) of psychotherapy and medication treatment response for OCD identified 26 eligible publications from 20 studies (average study total n=54 ± 41.6 [range: 11-175]; OCD group n=29 ± 19) in child, adolescent, and adult samples evaluating baseline brain structure correlates of treatment response as well as treatment-related changes in brain structure. Findings were inconsistent across studies; significant associations within the anterior cingulate cortex (3/5 regional, 2/8 whole brain studies) and orbitofrontal cortex (5/10 regional, 2/7 whole brain studies) were most common, but laterality and directionality were not always consistent. Structural neuroimaging markers of treatment response do not currently hold clinical utility. Given increasing evidence that associations between complex behavior and brain structure are characterized by small, but potentially meaningful, effects, much larger samples are likely needed. Multivariate approaches (e.g., machine learning) may also improve the clinical predictive utility of neuroimaging data.
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.