Bibliographic Details
| Title: |
Predicting Response to Pro‐Cognitive Interventions in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force. |
| Authors: |
Tsapekos, Dimosthenis (AUTHOR), Kalfas, Michail (AUTHOR), Schandorff, Johanna M. (AUTHOR), del Mar Bonnin, Caterina (AUTHOR), Bowie, Christopher R. (AUTHOR), Balanzá‐Martínez, Vicent (AUTHOR), Burdick, Katherine E. (AUTHOR), Carvalho, Andre F. (AUTHOR), Dols, Annemieke (AUTHOR), Douglas, Katie (AUTHOR), Gallagher, Peter (AUTHOR), Hasler, Gregor (AUTHOR), Kessing, Lars V. (AUTHOR), Kjærstad, Hanne L. (AUTHOR), Lafer, Beny (AUTHOR), Lewandowski, Kathryn E. (AUTHOR), López‐Jaramillo, Carlos (AUTHOR), Martinez‐Aran, Anabel (AUTHOR), McIntyre, Roger S. (AUTHOR), Porter, Richard J. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: |
Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. May2026, Vol. 153 Issue 5, p374-401. 28p. |
| Subjects: |
Cognitive ability, Cognitive rehabilitation, Mental depression, Affective disorders, Treatment effectiveness, Randomized controlled trials, Bipolar disorder |
| Abstract: |
Introduction: Major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD) are often associated with persistent cognitive deficits that impair psychosocial functioning. While pro‐cognitive interventions show promise, trial findings are inconsistent, potentially due to baseline factors influencing treatment response. This systematic review summarizes evidence on pre‐treatment characteristics associated with cognitive improvement and offers methodological recommendations. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library from inception to February 28, 2025. Eligible studies included primary or secondary analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating predictors of cognitive response to pro‐cognitive interventions in MDD and/or BD. Two researchers independently conducted study selection and risk of bias assessments. Findings were synthesized qualitatively. Results: Forty studies (N = 3864) were identified, covering pharmacological treatments (k = 20; N = 2299), psychological therapies (k = 16; N = 1165), brain stimulation (k = 2; N = 168), and physical activity (k = 2; N = 232). Poorer baseline cognitive performance was the most consistent predictor of greater cognitive improvement, though the direction of the effect was not entirely uniform across all studies. Baseline depression severity showed no significant association with cognitive outcomes. Age, education, sex, IQ, diagnosis, and medication status were similarly non‐predictive. Risk of bias was high in 77% of studies, mainly due to deviations from specified outcomes, poor randomization processes, and inconsistent handling of missing data. Considerable heterogeneity in interventions, outcome measures, and sample characteristics limited replicability and precluded meta‐analysis. Conclusion: Poorer baseline cognition emerged as the most reliable predictor of greater cognitive improvement across interventions. More rigorous, well‐powered studies are needed to replicate these findings and identify robust predictors to guide personalized pro‐cognitive treatment approaches in mood disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
