↓ Skip to main content

Progress in Elucidating Biomarkers of Antidepressant Pharmacological Treatment Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Last 15 Years

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Progress in Elucidating Biomarkers of Antidepressant Pharmacological Treatment Response: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Last 15 Years
Published in
Drugs, November 2017
DOI 10.1007/s40265-017-0819-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

G. Voegeli, M. L. Cléry-Melin, N. Ramoz, P. Gorwood

Abstract

Antidepressant drugs are widely prescribed, but response rates after 3 months are only around one-third, explaining the importance of the search of objectively measurable markers predicting positive treatment response. These markers are being developed in different fields, with different techniques, sample sizes, costs, and efficiency. It is therefore difficult to know which ones are the most promising. Our purpose was to compute comparable (i.e., standardized) effect sizes, at study level but also at marker level, in order to conclude on the efficacy of each technique used and all analyzed markers. We conducted a systematic search on the PubMed database to gather all articles published since 2000 using objectively measurable markers to predict antidepressant response from five domains, namely cognition, electrophysiology, imaging, genetics, and transcriptomics/proteomics/epigenetics. A manual screening of the abstracts and the reference lists of these articles completed the search process. Executive functioning, theta activity in the rostral Anterior Cingular Cortex (rACC), and polysomnographic sleep measures could be considered as belonging to the best objectively measured markers, with a combined d around 1 and at least four positive studies. For inter-category comparisons, the approaches that showed the highest effect sizes are, in descending order, imaging (combined d between 0.703 and 1.353), electrophysiology (0.294-1.138), cognition (0.929-1.022), proteins/nucleotides (0.520-1.18), and genetics (0.021-0.515). Markers of antidepressant treatment outcome are numerous, but with a discrepant level of accuracy. Many biomarkers and cognitions have sufficient predictive value (d ≥ 1) to be potentially useful for clinicians to predict outcome and personalize antidepressant treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Researcher 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Psychology 7 16%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 February 2019.
All research outputs
#13,220,513
of 23,007,053 outputs
Outputs from Drugs
#2,584
of 3,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,958
of 329,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,007,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.