↓ Skip to main content

A critical review of trials of transcranial direct current stimulation and trigeminal nerve stimulation for depression: the issue of treatment-emergent mania

Overview of attention for article published in Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
A critical review of trials of transcranial direct current stimulation and trigeminal nerve stimulation for depression: the issue of treatment-emergent mania
Published in
Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, March 2017
DOI 10.1590/2237-6089-2016-0027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Shiozawa, Quirino Cordeiro, Hyong Jin Cho, Alisson Paulino Trevizol, Elisa Brietzke

Abstract

This study is a critical review analyzing occurrence of treatment-emergent mania (TEM) related to transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and trigeminal nerve stimulation (TNS). We present a systematic review of the literature on TEM related to tDCS and TNS treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD), conducted in accordance with the recommendations from Cochrane Group and the PRISMA guidelines. Our search identified few reported episodes of TEM in the literature. In fact, we found 11 trials focused on treatment of MDD (seven controlled trials of tDCS and four trials of TNS, three open label and one controlled). We highlight the need for safety assessment in clinical research settings to establish with precision and in larger samples the risks inherent to the technique under investigation. Safety assessment is of fundamental importance in clinical research. TEM is a very important safety issue in MDD trials. Further and larger controlled trials will help to clarify both the safety and the clinical effects of combinations of pharmacotherapy and tDCS or TNS in daily clinical practice.

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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 20%
Researcher 1 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 20%
Psychology 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
#199
of 277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,546
of 324,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 277 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 324,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.