ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Mental Disorders After Cardiac Implantable Electronic Device Implantation in Young Individuals.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIncreasing use of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has raised concerns about psychological distress in young adults. We evaluated the risk of incident mental disorders after CIED implantation.
methodsUsing the Korean National Health Insurance database, we identified individuals aged 20 to 39 years who underwent health checkups in 2009 to 2012. Those receiving a new CIED within 4 years were included, and controls were selected by 1:5 matching for age, sex, and index year. The primary outcome was a composite of newly diagnosed mental disorders (mood disorders and anxiety/stress-related/somatoform disorders), and secondary outcomes were the individual components.
resultsThere were 569 CIED recipients (209 pacemakers, 360 implantable cardioverter-defibrillators) and 2821 matched controls analyzed. Over a median follow-up of 5.3 years, both the pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantations were associated with a significantly higher risk of the primary outcome compared with no device (hazard ratio [HR], 1.63 [95% CI, 1.20-2.21] and HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.39-2.35], respectively). In head-to-head analyses, the risk of the primary outcome did not differ significantly between implantable cardioverter-defibrillator and pacemaker recipients (adjusted HR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.75-1.59]). Risks of secondary outcomes were also increased in both device groups. CIED recipients had a 1.95-fold higher risk of mental disorders within 2 years postimplantation (95% CI, 1.45-2.62), and this elevated risk persisted beyond 2 years (HR, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.13-2.11]).
conclusionsAmong young individuals, both pacemaker and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantations were associated with increased risks of mental disorders, supporting proactive psychological screening and interventions.
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.