ArticleJournal of affective disorders2025
Comparing the effects of ECT and intravenous ketamine in psychiatric patients with major depressive episodes.
Article in Journal of affective disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundElectroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and intravenous (IV) ketamine are treatments used for severe depression and/or treatment-resistant depression (TRD). ECT is considered one of the most effective treatments for severe depression, although there is debate within the field regarding the effectiveness between ECT and IV ketamine in comparable TRD patient groups.
methodsThis retrospective chart review of open-label, nonrandomized treatment from a psychiatric hospital compared the effects of up to three weeks of ECT and IV ketamine in patients with major depressive episodes (MDEs). Our cohort included 146 inpatients and outpatients aged 18 to 74 years old. 94 patients received subanesthetic IV ketamine infusions 2 times a week, and 52 patients received ECT treatment 2-3 times a week. The primary outcome measure was the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
resultsOverall on the MADRS, 45.2 % of participants showed clinical symptom change between the beginning of treatment compared to the end of treatment, while 54.8 % did not. Reliable change index (RCI) analysis indicated 58.9 % showed significant symptom change, while 41.1 % did not. Chi-Square tests revealed significant associations between treatment type and clinical symptom change on the MADRS, with patients who received ECT showing greater symptom improvement compared to those who received ketamine (p < .05). Response rates of ECT and ketamine were 67.3 % and 45.7 %, respectively, whereas remission rates for ECT and ketamine were 60.0 % and 46.1 %, respectively.
conclusionsECT demonstrated the more robust antidepressant effects compared to ketamine. Randomized comparative trials are required to gain a better understanding of these 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.