↓ Skip to main content

Acupuncture for depression

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
58 tweeters
facebook
9 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
336 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Acupuncture for depression
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004046.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caroline A Smith, Mike Armour, Myeong Soo Lee, Li-Qiong Wang, Phillipa J Hay

Abstract

Depression is recognised as a major public health problem that has a substantial impact on individuals and on society. People with depression may consider using complementary therapies such as acupuncture, and an increasing body of research has been undertaken to assess the effectiveness of acupuncture for treatment of individuals with depression. This is the second update of this review. To examine the effectiveness and adverse effects of acupuncture for treatment of individuals with depression.To determine:• Whether acupuncture is more effective than treatment as usual/no treatment/wait list control for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than control acupuncture for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than pharmacological therapies for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture plus pharmacological therapy is more effective than pharmacological therapy alone for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Whether acupuncture is more effective than psychological therapies for treating and improving quality of life for individuals with depression.• Adverse effects of acupuncture compared with treatment as usual/no treatment/wait list control, control acupuncture, pharmacological therapies, and psychological therapies for treatment of individuals with depression. We searched the following databases to June 2016: Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group Controlled Trials Register (CCMD-CTR), Korean Studies Information Service System (KISS), DBPIA (Korean article database website), Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Research Information Service System (RISS), Korea Med, Korean Medical Database (KM base), and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System (OASIS), as well as several Korean medical journals. Review criteria called for inclusion of all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing acupuncture versus control acupuncture, no treatment, medication, other structured psychotherapies (cognitive-behavioural therapy, psychotherapy, or counselling), or standard care. Modes of treatment included acupuncture, electro-acupuncture, and laser acupuncture. Participants included adult men and women with depression diagnosed by Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC), International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD), or Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders Third Edition Revised (CCMD-3-R). If necessary, we used trial authors' definitions of depressive disorder. We performed meta-analyses using risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean differences (SMDs) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Primary outcomes were reduction in the severity of depression, measured by self-rating scales or by clinician-rated scales, and improvement in depression, defined as remission versus no remission. We assessed evidence quality using the GRADE method. This review is an update of previous versions and includes 64 studies (7104 participants). Most studies were at high risk of performance bias, at high or unclear risk of detection bias, and at low or unclear risk of selection bias, attrition bias, reporting bias, and other bias.Acupuncture versus no treatment/wait list/treatment as usualWe found low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture (manual and electro-) may moderately reduce the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.66, 95% CI -1.06 to -0.25, five trials, 488 participants). It is unclear whether data show differences between groups in the risk of adverse events (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.24, one trial, 302 participants; low-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus control acupuncture (invasive, non-invasive sham controls)Acupuncture may be associated with a small reduction in the severity of depression of 1.69 points on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) by end of treatment (95% CI -3.33 to -0.05, 14 trials, 841 participants; low-quality evidence). It is unclear whether data show differences between groups in the risk of adverse events (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.86, five trials, 300 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus medicationWe found very low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture may confer small benefit in reducing the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.40 to -0.05, 31 trials, 3127 participants). Studies show substantial variation resulting from use of different classes of medications and different modes of acupuncture stimulation. Very low-quality evidence suggests lower ratings of adverse events following acupuncture compared with medication alone, as measured by the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (mean difference (MD) -4.32, 95% CI -7.41 to -1.23, three trials, 481 participants).Acupuncture plus medication versus medication aloneWe found very low-quality evidence suggesting that acupuncture is highly beneficial in reducing the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -1.15, 95% CI -1.63 to -0.66, 11 trials, 775 participants). Studies show substantial variation resulting from use of different modes of acupuncture stimulation. It is unclear whether differences in adverse events are associated with different modes of acupuncture (SMD -1.32, 95% CI -2.86 to 0.23, three trials, 200 participants; very low-quality evidence).Acupuncture versus psychological therapyIt is unclear whether data show differences between acupuncture and psychological therapy in the severity of depression by end of treatment (SMD -0.5, 95% CI -1.33 to 0.33, two trials, 497 participants; low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence suggests no differences between groups in rates of adverse events (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.33, one trial, 452 participants). The reduction in severity of depression was less when acupuncture was compared with control acupuncture than when acupuncture was compared with no treatment control, although in both cases, results were rated as providing low-quality evidence. The reduction in severity of depression with acupuncture given alone or in conjunction with medication versus medication alone is uncertain owing to the very low quality of evidence. The effect of acupuncture compared with psychological therapy is unclear. The risk of adverse events with acupuncture is also unclear, as most trials did not report adverse events adequately. Few studies included follow-up periods or assessed important outcomes such as quality of life. High-quality randomised controlled trials are urgently needed to examine the clinical efficacy and acceptability of acupuncture, as well as its effectiveness, compared with acupuncture controls, medication, or psychological therapies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 58 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 336 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 5 1%
New Zealand 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 324 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 115 34%
Student > Master 59 18%
Researcher 37 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 9%
Unspecified 22 7%
Other 72 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 158 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 53 16%
Unspecified 30 9%
Psychology 24 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 7%
Other 48 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 75. 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 02 November 2018.
All research outputs
#185,737
of 12,236,619 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#394
of 8,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,860
of 273,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#15
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,236,619 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
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 273,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.