Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Affect Disord ; 361: 425-433, 2024 May 31.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38823590

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A more in-depth understanding of the relationship between depressive symptoms, neurocognition and suicidal behavior could provide insights into the prognosis and treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) and suicide. We conducted a network analysis among depressed patients examining associations between history of suicide attempt (HSA), core emotional major depression disorder, and key neurocognitive domains. METHOD: Depressed patients (n = 120) aged 18-65 years were recruited from a larger randomized clinical trial conducted at the Douglas Institute in Montreal, Canada. They were randomly assigned to receive one of two antidepressant treatments (i.e., escitalopram or desvenlafaxine) for 8 weeks. Core emotional MDD and key neurocognitive domains were assessed pre-post treatment. RESULTS: At baseline, an association between history of suicide attempt (HSA) and phonemic verbal fluency (PVF) suggested that HSA patients reported lower levels of the latter. After 8 weeks of antidepressant treatment, HSA became conditionally independent from PVF. Similar results were found for both the HAM-D and the QIDS-SR core emotional MDD/neurocognitive networks. CONCLUSION: Network analysis revealed a pre-treatment relationship between a HSA and decreased phonemic VF among depressed patients, which was no longer present after 8 weeks of antidepressant treatment.

2.
BMJ Open ; 13(8): e072289, 2023 08 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37620269

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Suicide is an important public health problem. Providing evidence-based psychosocial interventions to individuals presenting with self-harm is recognised as an important suicide prevention strategy. Therefore, it is crucial to understand which intervention is most effective in preventing self-harm repetition. We will evaluate the comparative efficacy of psychosocial interventions for the prevention of self-harm in adults. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) testing psychosocial interventions for the prevention of self-harm repetition. We will include RCTs in adults (mean age: 18 years or more) who presented with self-harm in the 6 months preceding enrolment in the trial. Interventions will be categorised according to their similarities and underpinning theoretical approaches (eg, cognitive behavioural therapy, case management). A health sciences librarian will update and adapt the search strategy from the most recent Cochrane pairwise systematic review on this topic. The searches will be performed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Cochrane Central (Wiley), Cochrane Protocols (Wiley), LILACS and PSYNDEX from 1 July 2020 (Cochrane review last search date) to 1 September 2023. The primary efficacy outcome will be self-harm repetition. Secondary outcomes will include suicide mortality, suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. Retention in treatment (ie, drop-outs rates) will be analysed as the main acceptability outcome. Two reviewers will independently assess the study eligibility and risk of bias (using RoB-2). An NMA will be performed to synthesise all direct and indirect comparisons. Ranked forest plots and Vitruvian plots will be used to represent graphically the results of the NMA. Credibility of network estimates will be evaluated using Confidence in NMA (CINeMA). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this is the protocol for an aggregate-data level NMA, ethical approval will not be required. Results will be disseminated at national/international conferences and in peer-review journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021273057.


Subject(s)
Self-Injurious Behavior , Suicide , Adult , Humans , Adolescent , Network Meta-Analysis , Psychosocial Intervention , Self-Injurious Behavior/prevention & control , Public Health , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic
3.
Patient Prefer Adherence ; 14: 13-21, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32021113

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patient-centered outcomes research (PCOR) emphasizes the patient perspective and input to inform the research process with the aim to improve the quality of care. Given PCOR's emphasis on the patient perspective, methods to incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are important. Electronic PROs (ePROs) have been implemented successfully in many populations; however, many of these measurements do not incorporate patient perspective in the development of ePROs. For epilepsy and seizure disorders, user perspectives are key to developing measurements that capture real-time data, as seizures are not timed events; therefore, patients can wait days or even weeks and then try to recall their experience which can lead to variations in recall. ePRO can provide the necessary assurance that data were entered by the patient at the time the episode occurs. The aim of the present study was to assess patient perceptions of completing ePROs, expectations of ePRO devices for PCOR and on-site clinical visit in order to guide the development of successful ePRO deployment in seizure-related disorders. METHODS: This study used a naturalistic cohort design. A sample of 713 persons completed an online survey which consisted of 11 situational questions. Of the 713 individuals, results from 640 participants were included. Results were compared using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: Most participants (71.9%) were able to accurately identify a seizure and 86.3% of participants felt it would be beneficial to have a short training on seizure symptoms prior to completing a daily seizure diary, and seizures should be reasonably reported within 10 mins (n = 426, 66.6%). Participants endorsed that repetitive movements and loss of consciousness as the most predominant symptoms they would look for in an ePRO. A majority of participants, 67.0% indicated that they regularly use accessibility features on using smartphones and tablets, and 38.6% indicated they would like to see more than one item per screen but only if they are related and to see all text in a larger size with scrolling features using fingers (n = 246; 38.4%). CONCLUSION: This study has demonstrated the importance of developing ePROs that satisfy the needs of the participants and caregivers without compromising the scientific and clinical aspects of the disease construct. Developing tools using participant needs, observations, characteristics and input is essential to putting the participant perspective in patient-centered outcomes research.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...