首页 > 最新文献

Evidence Based Mental Health最新文献

英文 中文
Using computerised adaptive tests to screen for perinatal depression in underserved women of colour. 使用计算机适应性测试筛选服务不足的有色人种妇女的围产期抑郁症。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300262
Elizabeth Wenzel, Beatriz Penalver Bernabe, Shannon Dowty, Unnathi Nagelli, Lacey Pezley, Robert Gibbons, Pauline Maki

Background: Compared with traditional screening questionnaires, computerised adaptive tests for severity of depression (CAT-DI) and computerised adaptive diagnostic modules for depression (CAD-MDD) show improved precision in screening for major depressive disorder. CAT measures have been tailored to perinatal women but have not been studied in low-income women of colour despite high rates of perinatal depression (PND).

Objective: This study aimed to examine the concordance between CAT and traditional measures of depression in a sample of primarily low-income black and Latina women.

Methods: In total, 373 women (49% black; 29% Latina) completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), CAD-MDD and CAT-DI at 845 visits across pregnancy and postpartum. We examined the concordance between continuous CAT-DI and PHQ-9 scores and between binary measures of PND diagnosis on CAD-MDD and the PHQ-9 (cut-off score >10). We examined cases with a positive PND diagnosis on the CAD-MDD but not on the PHQ-9 ('missed' cases) to determine whether clinic notes were consistent with CAD-MDD results.

Findings: CAT-DI and PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated (concordance correlation coefficient=0.67; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.74). CAD-MDD detected 5% more case of PND compared with PHQ-9 (p<0.001). The average per-visit rate of PND was 14.4% (14.5% in blacks, 14.9% in Latinas) on the CAD-MDD, and 9.5% (9.8% in blacks, 8.8% in Latinas) on the PHQ-9. Clinical notes were available on 60% of 'missed' cases and validated CAD-MDD PND diagnosis in 89% of cases.

Conclusions: CAD-MDD detected 5% more cases of PND in women of colour compared with traditional tests, and the majority of these cases were verified by clinician notes.

Clinical implications: Use of CAT in routine clinic care may address health disparities in PND screening.

背景:与传统的筛查问卷相比,计算机化抑郁严重程度适应性测试(CAT-DI)和计算机化抑郁适应性诊断模块(CAD-MDD)在筛查重度抑郁障碍方面显示出更高的准确性。尽管围产期抑郁症(PND)的发生率很高,但CAT措施是为围产期妇女量身定制的,但尚未对有色人种的低收入妇女进行研究。目的:本研究旨在检验在主要是低收入黑人和拉丁裔妇女的样本中,CAT和传统的抑郁测量之间的一致性。方法:共373名女性(49%为黑人;29%拉丁裔)在怀孕和产后的845次访问中完成了患者健康问卷-9 (PHQ-9)、CAD-MDD和CAT-DI。我们检查了连续CAT-DI和PHQ-9评分之间的一致性,以及CAD-MDD的PND诊断的二元测量与PHQ-9之间的一致性(截止评分>10)。我们检查了在CAD-MDD上诊断为PND阳性但在PHQ-9上没有诊断的病例(“遗漏”病例),以确定临床记录是否与CAD-MDD结果一致。结果:CAT-DI与PHQ-9评分显著相关(一致性相关系数=0.67;95% CI 0.58 ~ 0.74)。与PHQ-9相比,CAD-MDD检测出的PND病例多5%(结论:与传统检测相比,CAD-MDD在有色人种女性中检测出的PND病例多5%,这些病例中的大多数得到了临床医生的证实。临床意义:在常规临床护理中使用CAT可以解决PND筛查中的健康差异。
{"title":"Using computerised adaptive tests to screen for perinatal depression in underserved women of colour.","authors":"Elizabeth Wenzel,&nbsp;Beatriz Penalver Bernabe,&nbsp;Shannon Dowty,&nbsp;Unnathi Nagelli,&nbsp;Lacey Pezley,&nbsp;Robert Gibbons,&nbsp;Pauline Maki","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300262","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300262","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Compared with traditional screening questionnaires, computerised adaptive tests for severity of depression (CAT-DI) and computerised adaptive diagnostic modules for depression (CAD-MDD) show improved precision in screening for major depressive disorder. CAT measures have been tailored to perinatal women but have not been studied in low-income women of colour despite high rates of perinatal depression (PND).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to examine the concordance between CAT and traditional measures of depression in a sample of primarily low-income black and Latina women.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 373 women (49% black; 29% Latina) completed the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), CAD-MDD and CAT-DI at 845 visits across pregnancy and postpartum. We examined the concordance between continuous CAT-DI and PHQ-9 scores and between binary measures of PND diagnosis on CAD-MDD and the PHQ-9 (cut-off score >10). We examined cases with a positive PND diagnosis on the CAD-MDD but not on the PHQ-9 ('missed' cases) to determine whether clinic notes were consistent with CAD-MDD results.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>CAT-DI and PHQ-9 scores were significantly associated (concordance correlation coefficient=0.67; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.74). CAD-MDD detected 5% more case of PND compared with PHQ-9 (p<0.001). The average per-visit rate of PND was 14.4% (14.5% in blacks, 14.9% in Latinas) on the CAD-MDD, and 9.5% (9.8% in blacks, 8.8% in Latinas) on the PHQ-9. Clinical notes were available on 60% of 'missed' cases and validated CAD-MDD PND diagnosis in 89% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CAD-MDD detected 5% more cases of PND in women of colour compared with traditional tests, and the majority of these cases were verified by clinician notes.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>Use of CAT in routine clinic care may address health disparities in PND screening.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"23-28"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8792164/pdf/ebmental-2021-300262.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10293306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Dose-effect meta-analysis for psychopharmacological interventions using randomised data. 使用随机数据的精神药理学干预的剂量效应荟萃分析。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300278
Tasnim Hamza, Toshi A Furukawa, Nicola Orsini, Andrea Cipriani, Georgia Salanti

Objective: The current practice in meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacological interventions ignors the administered dose or restricts the analysis in a dose range. This may introduce unnecessary uncertainty and heterogeneity. Methods have been developed to integrate the dose-effect models in meta-analysis.

Methods: We describe the two-stage and the one-stage models to conduct a dose-effect meta-analysis using common or random effects methods. We illustrate the methods on a dataset of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants. The dataset comprises 60 randomised controlled trials. The dose-effect is measured on an odds ratio scale and is modelled using restricted cubic splines to detect departure from linearity.

Results: The estimated summary curve indicates that the probability of response increases up to 30 mg/day of fluoxetine-equivalent which results in reaching 50% probability to respond. Beyond 40 mg/day, no further increase in the response is observed. The one-stage model includes all studies, resulting in slightly less uncertainty than the two-stage model where only part of the data is analysed.

Conclusions: The dose-effect meta-analysis enables clinicians to understand how the effect of a drug changes as a function of its dose. Such analysis should be conducted in practice using the one-stage model that incorporates evidence from all available studies.

目的:目前对精神药理学干预效果的荟萃分析忽略了给药剂量或将分析限制在剂量范围内。这可能会引入不必要的不确定性和异质性。已经开发了将剂量效应模型整合到meta分析中的方法。方法:我们描述了两阶段模型和一阶段模型,使用常见或随机效应方法进行剂量效应荟萃分析。我们在选择性血清素再摄取抑制剂抗抑郁药的数据集上说明了方法。数据集包括60个随机对照试验。剂量效应在比值比尺度上测量,并使用受限三次样条进行建模以检测偏离线性。结果:估计的汇总曲线表明,当氟西汀当量达到30 mg/d时,反应概率增加,达到50%的反应概率。超过40毫克/天,没有观察到反应进一步增加。单阶段模型包括所有的研究,其不确定性比只分析部分数据的两阶段模型略小。结论:剂量效应荟萃分析使临床医生能够了解药物的效果如何随着剂量的变化而变化。这种分析应在实践中使用纳入所有现有研究证据的单阶段模型进行。
{"title":"Dose-effect meta-analysis for psychopharmacological interventions using randomised data.","authors":"Tasnim Hamza,&nbsp;Toshi A Furukawa,&nbsp;Nicola Orsini,&nbsp;Andrea Cipriani,&nbsp;Georgia Salanti","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300278","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300278","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current practice in meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacological interventions ignors the administered dose or restricts the analysis in a dose range. This may introduce unnecessary uncertainty and heterogeneity. Methods have been developed to integrate the dose-effect models in meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We describe the two-stage and the one-stage models to conduct a dose-effect meta-analysis using common or random effects methods. We illustrate the methods on a dataset of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants. The dataset comprises 60 randomised controlled trials. The dose-effect is measured on an odds ratio scale and is modelled using restricted cubic splines to detect departure from linearity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The estimated summary curve indicates that the probability of response increases up to 30 mg/day of fluoxetine-equivalent which results in reaching 50% probability to respond. Beyond 40 mg/day, no further increase in the response is observed. The one-stage model includes all studies, resulting in slightly less uncertainty than the two-stage model where only part of the data is analysed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The dose-effect meta-analysis enables clinicians to understand how the effect of a drug changes as a function of its dose. Such analysis should be conducted in practice using the one-stage model that incorporates evidence from all available studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231575/pdf/ebmental-2021-300278.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10270456","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
Promoting inclusivity by ensuring that all patients with mental health issues are offered research opportunities in the NHS. 通过确保所有有精神健康问题的患者在国民保健制度中获得研究机会,促进包容性。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2022-02-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300411
Catherine Henshall, Helen Jones, Tanya Smith, Andrea Cipriani
Researchactive clinical services have lower mortality rates and produce higher quality care outcomes, however, recruiting participants to clinical research in the National Health System (NHS) remains challenging. A recent study, assessing the feasibility of clinical staff electronically documenting patient consent to discuss research participation, indicated very low patient uptake, limiting its effectiveness as a strategy for improving access to research. A followon study comparing this ‘optin’ approach with an ‘optout’ approach, whereby patients are informed about research opportunities unless they indicate otherwise, found that patients and staff favoured an ‘optout’ approach and wanted research to be more accessible. Subsequently, in August 2021, Count me In was developed and launched within Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust adult and older adult mental health services. Count Me In is an optout initiative and a 12month implementation study, aiming to promote inclusivity by enabling greater equity of information provision for marginalised groups (including Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups, older adults, people with physical and mental disabilities, refugees and asylum seekers), rather than relying on clinicianled recruitment. It was developed in consultation with our Caldicott Guardian and Head of Information Governance to ensure correct handling of patient data and to differentiate the initiative from ‘national data optout’. A robust communications plan raised awareness of the initiative (https://www. oxfordhealth.nhs.uk/publication/countme-in/). Patient contact preferences and research involvement are documented on the electronic patient record. Preliminary findings illustrate that in just over 3 months, 8824 patients became contactable through Count Me In, a 400% increase on the number previously contactable through the ‘standard’ optin. Only 120 patients have opted out of contact. Of 234 potentially eligible patients contacted about specific research studies, 46 (19.6%) consented to participate. Inclusivity across age, gender, ethnicity and diagnostic group is being monitored and early evidence signals positive changes in equity of research access. For instance, the Count Me In cohort now represents patients across 62 of the 70 diagnostic groups represented in the Trust’s caseload, in comparison to only 44 groups represented using the standard ‘optin’ approach. A full evaluation at the end of the 12month implementation phase will highlight trends and changes in research activity, while also allowing for process modifications to be made before the initiative is rolled out across the country. The ultimate aim is to extend Count Me In to as many NHS Trusts as possible, embedding research within routine patient care and promoting inclusivity by ensuring that research opportunities are offered to all patients with mental health issues, regardless of diagnosis or how well known they are to clinicians.
{"title":"Promoting inclusivity by ensuring that all patients with mental health issues are offered research opportunities in the NHS.","authors":"Catherine Henshall,&nbsp;Helen Jones,&nbsp;Tanya Smith,&nbsp;Andrea Cipriani","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300411","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300411","url":null,"abstract":"Researchactive clinical services have lower mortality rates and produce higher quality care outcomes, however, recruiting participants to clinical research in the National Health System (NHS) remains challenging. A recent study, assessing the feasibility of clinical staff electronically documenting patient consent to discuss research participation, indicated very low patient uptake, limiting its effectiveness as a strategy for improving access to research. A followon study comparing this ‘optin’ approach with an ‘optout’ approach, whereby patients are informed about research opportunities unless they indicate otherwise, found that patients and staff favoured an ‘optout’ approach and wanted research to be more accessible. Subsequently, in August 2021, Count me In was developed and launched within Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust adult and older adult mental health services. Count Me In is an optout initiative and a 12month implementation study, aiming to promote inclusivity by enabling greater equity of information provision for marginalised groups (including Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups, older adults, people with physical and mental disabilities, refugees and asylum seekers), rather than relying on clinicianled recruitment. It was developed in consultation with our Caldicott Guardian and Head of Information Governance to ensure correct handling of patient data and to differentiate the initiative from ‘national data optout’. A robust communications plan raised awareness of the initiative (https://www. oxfordhealth.nhs.uk/publication/countme-in/). Patient contact preferences and research involvement are documented on the electronic patient record. Preliminary findings illustrate that in just over 3 months, 8824 patients became contactable through Count Me In, a 400% increase on the number previously contactable through the ‘standard’ optin. Only 120 patients have opted out of contact. Of 234 potentially eligible patients contacted about specific research studies, 46 (19.6%) consented to participate. Inclusivity across age, gender, ethnicity and diagnostic group is being monitored and early evidence signals positive changes in equity of research access. For instance, the Count Me In cohort now represents patients across 62 of the 70 diagnostic groups represented in the Trust’s caseload, in comparison to only 44 groups represented using the standard ‘optin’ approach. A full evaluation at the end of the 12month implementation phase will highlight trends and changes in research activity, while also allowing for process modifications to be made before the initiative is rolled out across the country. The ultimate aim is to extend Count Me In to as many NHS Trusts as possible, embedding research within routine patient care and promoting inclusivity by ensuring that research opportunities are offered to all patients with mental health issues, regardless of diagnosis or how well known they are to clinicians.","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"25 1","pages":"e1"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231587/pdf/ebmental-2021-300411.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10582051","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Prevalences of comorbid anxiety disorder and daily smartphone-based self-reported anxiety in patients with newly diagnosed bipolar disorder. 新诊断双相情感障碍患者共病焦虑障碍和每日基于智能手机的自我报告焦虑的患病率
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300259
Sharleny Stanislaus, Klara Coello, Hanne Lie Kjærstad, Kimie Stefanie Ormstrup Sletved, Ida Seeberg, Mads Frost, Jakob Eyvind Bardram, Rasmus Nejst Jensen, Maj Vinberg, Maria Faurholt-Jepsen, Lars Vedel Kessing

Background: Around 40% of patients with bipolar disorder (BD) additionally have anxiety disorder. The prevalence of anxiety in patients with newly diagnosed BD and their first-degree relatives (UR) has not been investigated.ObjectiveTo investigate (1) the prevalence of a comorbid anxiety diagnosis in patients with newly diagnosed BD and their UR, (2) sociodemographic and clinical differences between patients with and without a comorbid anxiety diagnosis and (3) the association between smartphone-based patient-reported anxiety and observer-based ratings of anxiety and functioning, respectively.

Methods: We recruited 372 patients with BD and 116 of their UR. Daily smartphone-based data were provided from 125 patients. SCAN was used to assess comorbid anxiety diagnoses.

Findings: In patients with BD, the prevalence of a comorbid anxiety disorder was 11.3% (N=42) and 10.3% and 5.9% in partial and full remission, respectively. In UR, the prevalence was 6.9%. Patients with a comorbid anxiety disorder had longer illness duration (p=0.016) and higher number of affective episodes (p=0.011). Smartphone-based patient-reported anxiety symptoms were associated with ratings of anxiety and impaired functioning (p<0.001).

Limitations: The SCAN interviews to diagnose comorbid anxiety disorder were carried out regardless of the participants' mood state.Clinical implicationsThe lower prevalence of anxiety in newly diagnosed BD than in later stages of BD indicates that anxiety increases with progression of BD. Comorbid anxiety seems associated with poorer clinical outcomes and functioning and smartphones are clinically useful for monitoring anxiety symptoms.

Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02888262).

背景:大约40%的双相情感障碍(BD)患者还伴有焦虑障碍。新诊断的双相障碍患者及其一级亲属(UR)的焦虑患病率尚未调查。目的调查(1)新诊断的BD患者及其UR中共病焦虑诊断的患病率;(2)共病焦虑诊断患者与未共病焦虑诊断患者之间的社会人口学和临床差异;(3)基于智能手机的患者报告焦虑与基于观察者的焦虑和功能评分之间的相关性。方法:我们招募了372例BD患者和116例UR患者。125名患者提供了基于智能手机的日常数据。SCAN用于评估共病性焦虑诊断。结果:在双相障碍患者中,共病焦虑症的患病率分别为11.3% (N=42),部分缓解和完全缓解的患病率分别为10.3%和5.9%。在尿路中,患病率为6.9%。合并焦虑障碍的患者病程较长(p=0.016),情绪发作次数较多(p=0.011)。基于智能手机的患者报告的焦虑症状与焦虑和功能受损的评分有关(局限性:用于诊断共病焦虑障碍的SCAN访谈是在不考虑参与者的情绪状态的情况下进行的。)临床意义新诊断双相障碍患者的焦虑患病率低于双相障碍晚期患者,这表明焦虑随着双相障碍的进展而增加。共病性焦虑似乎与较差的临床结果和功能有关,智能手机在临床上对监测焦虑症状很有用。试验注册号:ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02888262)。
{"title":"Prevalences of comorbid anxiety disorder and daily smartphone-based self-reported anxiety in patients with newly diagnosed bipolar disorder.","authors":"Sharleny Stanislaus,&nbsp;Klara Coello,&nbsp;Hanne Lie Kjærstad,&nbsp;Kimie Stefanie Ormstrup Sletved,&nbsp;Ida Seeberg,&nbsp;Mads Frost,&nbsp;Jakob Eyvind Bardram,&nbsp;Rasmus Nejst Jensen,&nbsp;Maj Vinberg,&nbsp;Maria Faurholt-Jepsen,&nbsp;Lars Vedel Kessing","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300259","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Around 40% of patients with bipolar disorder (BD) additionally have anxiety disorder. The prevalence of anxiety in patients with newly diagnosed BD and their first-degree relatives (UR) has not been investigated.ObjectiveTo investigate (1) the prevalence of a comorbid anxiety diagnosis in patients with newly diagnosed BD and their UR, (2) sociodemographic and clinical differences between patients with and without a comorbid anxiety diagnosis and (3) the association between smartphone-based patient-reported anxiety and observer-based ratings of anxiety and functioning, respectively.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited 372 patients with BD and 116 of their UR. Daily smartphone-based data were provided from 125 patients. SCAN was used to assess comorbid anxiety diagnoses.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>In patients with BD, the prevalence of a comorbid anxiety disorder was 11.3% (N=42) and 10.3% and 5.9% in partial and full remission, respectively. In UR, the prevalence was 6.9%. Patients with a comorbid anxiety disorder had longer illness duration (p=0.016) and higher number of affective episodes (p=0.011). Smartphone-based patient-reported anxiety symptoms were associated with ratings of anxiety and impaired functioning (p<0.001).</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>The SCAN interviews to diagnose comorbid anxiety disorder were carried out regardless of the participants' mood state.Clinical implicationsThe lower prevalence of anxiety in newly diagnosed BD than in later stages of BD indicates that anxiety increases with progression of BD. Comorbid anxiety seems associated with poorer clinical outcomes and functioning and smartphones are clinically useful for monitoring anxiety symptoms.</p><p><strong>Trial registration number: </strong>ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT02888262).</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"24 4","pages":"137-144"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231557/pdf/ebmental-2021-300259.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10214193","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Guidelines to understand and compute the number needed to treat. 了解和计算治疗所需数量的指南。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2020-300232
Valentin Vancak, Yair Goldberg, Stephen Z Levine

Objective: We aim to explain the unadjusted, adjusted and marginal number needed to treat (NNT) and provide software for clinicians to compute them.

Methods: The NNT is an efficacy index that is commonly used in randomised clinical trials. The NNT is the average number of patients needed to treat to obtain one successful outcome (ie, response) due to treatment. We developed the nntcalc R package for desktop use and extended it to a user-friendly web application. We provided users with a user-friendly step-by-step guide. The application calculates the NNT for various models with and without explanatory variables. The implemented models for the adjusted NNT are linear regression and analysis of variance (ANOVA), logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. If no explanatory variables are available, one can compute the unadjusted Laupacis et al's NNT, Kraemer and Kupfer's NNT and the Furukawa and Leucht's NNT. All NNT estimators are computed with their associated appropriate 95% confidence intervals. All calculations are in R and are replicable.

Results: The application provides the user with an easy-to-use web application to compute the NNT in different settings and models. We illustrate the use of the application from examples in schizophrenia research based on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The application is available from https://nntcalc.iem.technion.ac.il. The output is given in a journal compatible text format, which users can copy and paste or download in a comma-separated values format.

Conclusion: This application will help researchers and clinicians assess the efficacy of treatment and consequently improve the quality and accuracy of decisions.

目的:我们旨在解释未调整数、调整数和治疗所需的边缘数(NNT),并为临床医生提供计算它们的软件。方法:NNT是随机临床试验中常用的疗效指标。NNT是指因治疗而获得一个成功结果(即反应)所需治疗的患者平均人数。我们开发了用于桌面的nntcalc R包,并将其扩展为一个用户友好的web应用程序。我们为用户提供了一个用户友好的分步指南。应用程序计算带有和不带有解释变量的各种模型的NNT。对调整后的NNT实施的模型是线性回归和方差分析(ANOVA)、逻辑回归、Kaplan-Meier和Cox回归。如果没有可用的解释变量,可以计算未经调整的Laupacis等人的NNT, Kraemer和Kupfer的NNT以及Furukawa和Leucht的NNT。所有的NNT估计量都是用相应的95%置信区间来计算的。所有的计算都是用R进行的,并且是可复制的。结果:该应用程序为用户提供了一个易于使用的web应用程序,可以在不同的设置和模型下计算NNT。我们举例说明应用程序在精神分裂症研究基于积极和消极综合症量表。该应用程序可从https://nntcalc.iem.technion.ac.il获得。输出以日志兼容的文本格式给出,用户可以复制粘贴或以逗号分隔值格式下载。结论:该应用程序将帮助研究人员和临床医生评估治疗效果,从而提高决策的质量和准确性。
{"title":"Guidelines to understand and compute the number needed to treat.","authors":"Valentin Vancak,&nbsp;Yair Goldberg,&nbsp;Stephen Z Levine","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2020-300232","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2020-300232","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aim to explain the unadjusted, adjusted and marginal number needed to treat (NNT) and provide software for clinicians to compute them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The NNT is an efficacy index that is commonly used in randomised clinical trials. The NNT is the average number of patients needed to treat to obtain one successful outcome (ie, response) due to treatment. We developed the nntcalc R package for desktop use and extended it to a user-friendly web application. We provided users with a user-friendly step-by-step guide. The application calculates the NNT for various models with and without explanatory variables. The implemented models for the adjusted NNT are linear regression and analysis of variance (ANOVA), logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression. If no explanatory variables are available, one can compute the unadjusted Laupacis <i>et al</i>'s NNT, Kraemer and Kupfer's NNT and the Furukawa and Leucht's NNT. All NNT estimators are computed with their associated appropriate 95% confidence intervals. All calculations are in R and are replicable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The application provides the user with an easy-to-use web application to compute the NNT in different settings and models. We illustrate the use of the application from examples in schizophrenia research based on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The application is available from https://nntcalc.iem.technion.ac.il. The output is given in a journal compatible text format, which users can copy and paste or download in a comma-separated values format.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This application will help researchers and clinicians assess the efficacy of treatment and consequently improve the quality and accuracy of decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"24 4","pages":"131-136"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231569/pdf/ebmental-2020-300232.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10212217","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. 儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍心理治疗的比较疗效和可接受性:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346
Yajie Xiang, Andrea Cipriani, Teng Teng, Cinzia Del Giovane, Yuqing Zhang, John R Weisz, Xuemei Li, Pim Cuijpers, Xueer Liu, Jürgen Barth, Yuanliang Jiang, David Cohen, Li Fan, Donna Gillies, Kang Du, Arun V Ravindran, Xinyu Zhou, Peng Xie

Background: Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.

Objective: We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.

Methods: We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.

Findings: We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between -2.42 and -0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between -1.92 and -0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as 'moderate' to 'very low' in terms of confidence of evidence.

Conclusions: CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients' preferences in real clinical practice.

背景:关于儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)心理治疗的相对疗效和可接受性的现有证据仍然不确定。目的:对儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍心理治疗的不同类型和形式进行比较和排名。方法:截至2020年12月31日,我们检索了8个数据库和其他国际注册数据库。两两荟萃分析和频率网络荟萃分析采用随机效应模型估计合并标准化平均差异(SMDs)和or。观察治疗后及随访疗效、可接受性、抑郁及焦虑症状。研究结果:我们纳入了56项随机对照试验,涉及5327名患者,比较了14种不同类型的心理疗法和3种对照条件。在治疗后和随访中,认知加工治疗(CPT)、行为治疗(BT)、个体创伤型认知行为治疗(TF-CBT)、眼动脱敏和再加工以及TF-CBT组的疗效显著优于所有对照组(smd在-2.42至-0.25之间)。此外,CPT, BT和个体TF-CBT比支持治疗更有效(smd在-1.92至-0.49之间)。抑郁和焦虑症状的结果与主要结局的结果相似。就证据的可信度而言,大多数结果被评为“中等”至“非常低”。结论:CPT、BT和单独的TF-CBT是治疗年轻PTSD患者的最佳选择。其他类型和不同的提供心理治疗的方式可以作为替代选择。临床医生应该在实际临床实践中考虑每个结果的重要性和患者的偏好。
{"title":"Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Yajie Xiang,&nbsp;Andrea Cipriani,&nbsp;Teng Teng,&nbsp;Cinzia Del Giovane,&nbsp;Yuqing Zhang,&nbsp;John R Weisz,&nbsp;Xuemei Li,&nbsp;Pim Cuijpers,&nbsp;Xueer Liu,&nbsp;Jürgen Barth,&nbsp;Yuanliang Jiang,&nbsp;David Cohen,&nbsp;Li Fan,&nbsp;Donna Gillies,&nbsp;Kang Du,&nbsp;Arun V Ravindran,&nbsp;Xinyu Zhou,&nbsp;Peng Xie","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between -2.42 and -0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between -1.92 and -0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as 'moderate' to 'very low' in terms of confidence of evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients' preferences in real clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"24 4","pages":"153-160"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0c/75/ebmental-2021-300346.PMC8543231.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10269967","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8
Correspondence on "How can we estimate QALYs based on PHQ-9 scores? Equipercentile linking analysis of PHQ-9 and EQ-5D" by Furukawa et al. 关于“我们如何根据PHQ-9分数来估计QALYs ?”Furukawa等人对PHQ-9和EQ-5D的等百分位连锁分析。
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-11-01 DOI: 10.1136/ebmental-2021-300265
Matthew Franklin, Tracey Young
Furukawa et al posed the question: how can we estimate qualityadjusted life years (QALYs) based on Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores? They recommend equipercentile linking analysis between the depression severity PHQ-9 and preferencebased EQ5D threelevel version (EQ5D3L; UK value set), the latter used to estimate utility data for QALYs. Furukawa et al refer to the process of ‘crosswalking’, whereby the practice of fitting a statistical model to health utility data has been referred to as ‘mapping’ and 'crosswalking’. Furukawa et al reference two mappingrelated papers (their references 7 and 9); however, their analysis seems to have missed rigorous mapping methodology and previous studies which have used these mapping processes, alongside other conceptual considerations when wanting to ‘crosswalk’/‘map’ from a nonpreferencebased (often conditionspecific) measure such as the PHQ-9 to the preferencebased EQ5D3L. Clear guidance for mapping has been set out by Wailoo et al. A case for equipercentile linking for mapping has been made based on suggested limitations of the more commonly used regression methods; the case for regression is described by Alava et al. A systematic review of mapping studies published in 2019 states: ‘There were 180 papers with 233 mapping functions in total [identified]...The last 10 years has seen a substantial increase in the number of mapping studies and some evidence of advancement in methods with [...] greater reporting of predictive ability of mapping functions’. From this review, the majority of mapping functions were generated to obtain EQ5D3L/EQ5D fivelevel version (EQ5D5L)/childfriendly EQ5D version (EQ5DY) scores (n=147) among other preferencebased measure scores; eg, ShortForm SixDimension (SF6D, n=45). Furukawa et al reference one study, which was also identified by Mukuria et al, which maps from the PHQ-9 to the SF6D (not EQ5D3L), which concluded that: ‘mapping from mental health conditionspecific measures, such as the widely used PHQ-9, GAD [(Generalized Anxiety Disorder)] and HADS [(Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale)], may not be an appropriate approach to generating EQ5D and SF6D scores as these measures focus on specific symptoms and not on the wider impact of mental health conditions’ (their reference 7). Furukawa et al is mapping and therefore existing rigorous mapping methods should be used and compared with the suggested equipercentile linking analysis. We recommend not using the suggested conversion table by Furukawa et al until further conceptual and statistical analyses have been conducted, including reporting of performance statistics to allow method performance to be judged and compared against existing mapping studies in the empirical literature. We make this recommendation on the basis that Furukawa et al currently provides no reported performance statistics or comparisons to suggest the potential predictive ability of using the conversion table; therefore there is no way to judge t
{"title":"Correspondence on \"How can we estimate QALYs based on PHQ-9 scores? Equipercentile linking analysis of PHQ-9 and EQ-5D\" by Furukawa <i>et al</i>.","authors":"Matthew Franklin,&nbsp;Tracey Young","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300265","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300265","url":null,"abstract":"Furukawa et al posed the question: how can we estimate qualityadjusted life years (QALYs) based on Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores? They recommend equipercentile linking analysis between the depression severity PHQ-9 and preferencebased EQ5D threelevel version (EQ5D3L; UK value set), the latter used to estimate utility data for QALYs. Furukawa et al refer to the process of ‘crosswalking’, whereby the practice of fitting a statistical model to health utility data has been referred to as ‘mapping’ and 'crosswalking’. Furukawa et al reference two mappingrelated papers (their references 7 and 9); however, their analysis seems to have missed rigorous mapping methodology and previous studies which have used these mapping processes, alongside other conceptual considerations when wanting to ‘crosswalk’/‘map’ from a nonpreferencebased (often conditionspecific) measure such as the PHQ-9 to the preferencebased EQ5D3L. Clear guidance for mapping has been set out by Wailoo et al. A case for equipercentile linking for mapping has been made based on suggested limitations of the more commonly used regression methods; the case for regression is described by Alava et al. A systematic review of mapping studies published in 2019 states: ‘There were 180 papers with 233 mapping functions in total [identified]...The last 10 years has seen a substantial increase in the number of mapping studies and some evidence of advancement in methods with [...] greater reporting of predictive ability of mapping functions’. From this review, the majority of mapping functions were generated to obtain EQ5D3L/EQ5D fivelevel version (EQ5D5L)/childfriendly EQ5D version (EQ5DY) scores (n=147) among other preferencebased measure scores; eg, ShortForm SixDimension (SF6D, n=45). Furukawa et al reference one study, which was also identified by Mukuria et al, which maps from the PHQ-9 to the SF6D (not EQ5D3L), which concluded that: ‘mapping from mental health conditionspecific measures, such as the widely used PHQ-9, GAD [(Generalized Anxiety Disorder)] and HADS [(Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale)], may not be an appropriate approach to generating EQ5D and SF6D scores as these measures focus on specific symptoms and not on the wider impact of mental health conditions’ (their reference 7). Furukawa et al is mapping and therefore existing rigorous mapping methods should be used and compared with the suggested equipercentile linking analysis. We recommend not using the suggested conversion table by Furukawa et al until further conceptual and statistical analyses have been conducted, including reporting of performance statistics to allow method performance to be judged and compared against existing mapping studies in the empirical literature. We make this recommendation on the basis that Furukawa et al currently provides no reported performance statistics or comparisons to suggest the potential predictive ability of using the conversion table; therefore there is no way to judge t","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"24 4","pages":"e5"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300265","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10565607","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Brief Evidence-Based Interventions for Child and Adolescent Mental Health 儿童和青少年心理健康的循证干预措施简介
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1891/9780826167279.0017
P. Lusk, B. Melnyk
{"title":"Brief Evidence-Based Interventions for Child and Adolescent Mental Health","authors":"P. Lusk, B. Melnyk","doi":"10.1891/9780826167279.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826167279.0017","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76022265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Reimbursement for Mental/Behavioral Health Services in Primary Care 补偿初级保健中的心理/行为健康服务
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1891/9780826167279.0016
N. Herendeen
{"title":"Reimbursement for Mental/Behavioral Health Services in Primary Care","authors":"N. Herendeen","doi":"10.1891/9780826167279.0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826167279.0016","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72968785","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Helping Children and Parents Through Marital Separation and Divorce 帮助孩子和父母度过婚姻分居和离婚
IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1891/9780826167279.0010
{"title":"Helping Children and Parents Through Marital Separation and Divorce","authors":"","doi":"10.1891/9780826167279.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826167279.0010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74842348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Evidence Based Mental Health
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1