↓ Skip to main content

Second generation antipsychotics in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Psychopharmacology, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
142 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Second generation antipsychotics in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Journal of Psychopharmacology, September 2011
DOI 10.1177/0269881111408461
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jürgen De Fruyt, Ellen Deschepper, Kurt Audenaert, Eric Constant, Michel Floris, William Pitchot, Pascal Sienaert, Daniel Souery, Stephan Claes

Abstract

Depressive symptoms and episodes dominate the course of bipolar disorder. However, the therapeutic armamentarium for bipolar depression is limited. Recent evidence points to the efficacy of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for the treatment of bipolar depression. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of SGAs (randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials; used in monotherapy) in the treatment of adult patients with bipolar depression. Publication bias was corrected for by performing similar searches using the clinical trials register of the respective pharmaceutical companies, the Cochrane Database and ClinicalTrials.gov. Seven published papers were identified on the use of aripiprazole, olanzapine and quetiapine. Internal validity of the trials was fairly good, external validity only moderate. Different outcome measures of efficacy and safety were assessed. When the individual trials were looked at, quetiapine and to a lesser extent olanzapine demonstrated significant improvement in MADRS (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale) total scores. This was not demonstrated for aripiprazole. Efficacy was hampered by adverse events, such as weight gain, akathisia and somnolence/sedation. Both clinical heterogeneity of the included trials and statistical heterogeneity of the meta-analytic data were considerable. The number of quetiapine trials was disproportionate to the number of trials of aripiprazole and olanzapine. Further research is needed to assess differential efficacy of the different SGAs and their use in clinical practice.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 139 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 15%
Other 16 11%
Student > Master 16 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Other 34 24%
Unknown 27 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 40%
Psychology 11 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 7%
Neuroscience 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 4%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 33 23%
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 30 September 2020.
All research outputs
#7,451,284
of 22,780,165 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Psychopharmacology
#899
of 1,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,581
of 130,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Psychopharmacology
#11
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 130,773 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.