Cited by 185Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesTreatment of Major DepressionElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies

Effectiveness of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation in Clinical Practice Post-FDA Approval in the United States: Results Observed With the First 100 Consecutive Cases of Depression at an Academic Medical Center

Connolly, K. Ryan, Helmer, Amanda, Cristancho, Mario A., Cristancho, Pilar, O’Reardon, John P.·2012·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

Introduction Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients who have not responded to 1 adequate antidepressant trial in the current episode. In a retrospective cohort study, we examined the effectiveness and safety of TMS in the first 100 consecutive patients treated for depression (full DSM-IV criteria for major depressive episode in either major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder) at an academic medical center between July 21, 2008, and March 25, 2011. Method TMS was flexibly dosed in a course of up to 30 sessions, adjunctive to current medications, for 85 patients treated for acute depression. The primary outcomes were response and remission rates at treatment end point as measured by the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I) at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS); Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, self-report (QIDS-SR); Beck Depression Inventory (BDI); Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI); and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Enduring benefit was assessed over 6 months in patients receiving maintenance TMS treatment. Data from 12 patients who received TMS as maintenance or continuation treatment after prior electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) or TMS given in a clinical trial setting were also reviewed. Results The clinical cohort was treatment resistant, with a mean of 3.4 failed adequate trials in…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.11m07413

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Connolly, K. R., Helmer, A., Cristancho, M. A., Cristancho, P., & O’Reardon, J. P.
Affiliations
Philadelphia VA Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Connolly, K. Ryan
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2012-04-15
Volume
73
Issue
04
Pages
e567-e573
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2002540421
Cited by
185
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 4
FWCI
5.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Electroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Keywords
transcranial magnetic stimulation, major depressive disorder, treatment-resistant depression, bipolar depression, treatment response and remission, TMS safety, adjunctive antidepressant therapy, electroconvulsive therapy
MeSH terms
Academic Medical Centers, Bipolar Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Electroshock, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Remission Induction, Retrospective Studies, United States, Logistic Models, Treatment Outcome, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review