↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Antiglucocorticoid treatments for mood disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Antiglucocorticoid treatments for mood disorders
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005168.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Gallagher, Navdeep Malik, James Newham, Allan H Young, I Nicol Ferrier, Paul Mackin

Abstract

Antiglucocorticoids may have antidepressant effects and have been reported to be efficacious in the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders. The efficacy and safety of antiglucocorticoid treatments for mood disorders is the subject of this systematic review. To compare the efficacy and safety of antiglucocorticoid agents in the treatment of mood episodes (manic, mixed affective or depressive) with placebo or alternative drug treatment in mood disorders. CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References were searched on 11-9-2007. Additional searches of electronic databases were conducted in December 2006. Conference proceedings were searched. Experts and pharmaceutical companies were contacted. Randomised controlled trials comparing antiglucocorticoid drugs in the treatment of mood episodes with placebo or alternative drug treatment in mood disorders were selected. Data were extracted and the methodological quality of each study was assessed independently by two review authors. Meta-analyses were performed using Review Manager software. Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes. For continuous data, weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated. Nine studies met criteria for inclusion. A number of drugs were examined, including mifepristone [RU-486], ketoconazole, metyrapone and DHEA. Three trials were in patients with psychotic major depression (pMDD), five trials in non-psychotic major depression and one trial in bipolar disorder. When examining all trials together across all affective episodes, there was no significant difference in the overall proportion of patients responding to antiglucocorticoid treatment over placebo, although the mean change in HAM-D scores indicated a significant difference in favour of treatment (WMD -4.54, 95%CI -6.78 to -2.29). Of the five trials in non-psychotic depression (unipolar or bipolar), there was a significant difference favouring treatment (HAM-D 50% reduction: RR 0.72, 95%CI 0.56 to 0.91). In pMDD, there was no evidence of an overall antidepressant effect (HAM-D 50% reduction: RR 0.98, 95%CI 0.79 to 1.22) or an effect on overall psychopathology (BPRS 30% reduction: RR 0.96, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.22). In these subtypes, the mean change in HAM-D indicated a significant difference in favour of treatment. The use of antiglucocorticoids in the treatment of mood disorders is at the proof-of-concept stage. Considerable methodological differences exist between studies with respect to the compounds used and the patient cohorts studied. Results in some diagnostic subtypes are promising and warrant further investigation to establish the clinical utility of these drugs in the treatment of mood disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 47 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Student > Master 5 10%
Professor 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 29%
Psychology 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 10 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#7,811,306
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,625
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,323
of 278,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#203
of 281 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 278,464 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 281 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.