SynthesisActa psychiatrica Scandinavica2026
Predicting Response to Pro-Cognitive Interventions in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force.
Synthesis in Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predicting Response to Pro-Cognitive Interventions in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMajor depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) are often associated with persistent cognitive deficits that impair psychosocial functioning. While pro-cognitive interventions show promise, trial findings are inconsistent, potentially due to baseline factors influencing treatment response. This systematic review summarizes evidence on pre-treatment characteristics associated with cognitive improvement and offers methodological recommendations.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library from inception to February 28, 2025. Eligible studies included primary or secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating predictors of cognitive response to pro-cognitive interventions in MDD and/or BD. Two researchers independently conducted study selection and risk of bias assessments. Findings were synthesized qualitatively.
resultsForty studies (N = 3864) were identified, covering pharmacological treatments (k = 20; N = 2299), psychological therapies (k = 16; N = 1165), brain stimulation (k = 2; N = 168), and physical activity (k = 2; N = 232). Poorer baseline cognitive performance was the most consistent predictor of greater cognitive improvement, though the direction of the effect was not entirely uniform across all studies. Baseline depression severity showed no significant association with cognitive outcomes. Age, education, sex, IQ, diagnosis, and medication status were similarly non-predictive. Risk of bias was high in 77% of studies, mainly due to deviations from specified outcomes, poor randomization processes, and inconsistent handling of missing data. Considerable heterogeneity in interventions, outcome measures, and sample characteristics limited replicability and precluded meta-analysis.
conclusionPoorer baseline cognition emerged as the most reliable predictor of greater cognitive improvement across interventions. More rigorous, well-powered studies are needed to replicate these findings and identify robust predictors to guide personalized pro-cognitive treatment approaches in mood disorders.
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.