To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Despite therapeutic advances, we still have difficulties in predicting response to treatment in bipolar disorder (BD). Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) has been put forward as a potential peripheral marker of treatment response.
To prospectively study the relation between clinical response to treatment and serum BDNF levels.
To investigate a) a possible association between serum BDNF levels and clinical response along 16 week follow-up and b) the role of val66met polymorphism in clinical response in a sample of drug-free patients with BD going through a mood episode.
This is a naturalistic, open-label prospective nested case control study matched for age, gender and ethnicity. Patients were 18 years or older, required BD diagnosis, undergoing a current manic, mixed or depressive episode and be off-medication for at least 2 weeks. Clinical assessment and blood withdrawn were conducted along follow-up. At the end of the study, patients were classified according to clinical response.
25 of 36 (69.4%) of the patients were female and the mean age was 37.8 (SD 11.8) years old. Baseline serum BDNF levels did not show any difference between patients and controls (p = 0.075).There was a significant negative correlation between differences in serum BDNF levels and in CGI score along follow-up (r = −.372, p = 0.028). Serum BDNF levels were significant higher in responders compared to non-responders at week 4, 8 and 16 (p = 0.026, p = 0.009, p = 0.001 respectively). Val66met polymorphism did not seem to interfere in clinical response.
Changes in serum BDNF levels may help in monitoring treatment response.
The scientific community assumes that rigorous methodology research is more likely to be published in high impact psychiatry journals (HIJ). We aimed to test which methodological variables could predict publication in HIJ.
We conducted a systematic review of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from 2013, January 1st to 2015, June 15th. Inclusion criteria were studies that were RCTs whose at least one arm of the study should be fluoxetine regarding adult patients (> 18 years old) with MDD. We performed logistic regression regarding the number of participants, intention-to-treat analysis, blinding, multicenter study, sample losses, positive result, sponsorship of pharmacy's industry, and h-index of the last author. A HIJ was considered if journal impact factor was above the median or 3rd quartile of our sample.
Forty-two studies were considered for the final analysis. The results of the univariate logistic regression found no differences between HIJ and low impact psychiatry journals for all methodological variables, except the h-index of the last author. By considering HIJ when impact factor was above the mean, h-index had an odds ratio = 1.09 (1.01–1.17), P = 0.02; considering HIJ when impact factor was above the 3rd quartile, h-index had an odds ratio = 1.07 (1.01–1.14), P = 0.02.
Our results indicate that the author productivity may be a relevant predictor for publication in a HIJ in the psychiatry/psychology field. Our study proposes that journals focus on identifying what are the relevant criteria for publication approval in the peer-review process.
Disclosure of interest
The authors have not supplied their declaration of competing interest.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.