↓ Skip to main content

The direct and indirect effects of lurasidone monotherapy on functional improvement among patients with bipolar depression: results from a randomized placebo-controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
The direct and indirect effects of lurasidone monotherapy on functional improvement among patients with bipolar depression: results from a randomized placebo-controlled trial
Published in
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40345-016-0049-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krithika Rajagopalan, Elizabeth Dansie Bacci, Kathleen W. Wyrwich, Andrei Pikalov, Antony Loebel

Abstract

Bipolar depression is characterized by depressive symptoms and impairment in many areas of functioning, including work, family, and social life. The objective of this study was to assess the independent, direct effect of lurasidone treatment on functioning improvement, and examine the indirect effect of lurasidone treatment on functioning improvement, mediated through improvements in depression symptoms. Data from a 6-week placebo-controlled trial assessing the effect of lurasidone monotherapy versus placebo in patients with bipolar depression was used. Patient functioning was measured using the Sheehan disability scale (SDS). Descriptive statistics were used to assess the effect of lurasidone on improvement on the SDS total and domain scores (work/school, social, and family life), as well as number of days lost and unproductive due to symptoms. Path analyses evaluated the total effect (β1), as well as the indirect effect (β2×β3) and direct effect (β4) of lurasidone treatment on SDS total score change, using standardized beta path coefficients and baseline scores as covariates. The direct effect of treatment on SDS total score change and indirect effects accounting for mediation through depression improvement were examined for statistical significance and magnitude using MPlus. In this 6-week trial (N = 485), change scores from baseline to 6-weeks were significantly larger for both lurasidone treatment dosage groups versus placebo on the SDS total and all three SDS domain scores (p < 0.05). Through path analyses, lurasidone treatment predicted improvement in depression (β2 = -0.33, p = 0.009), subsequently predicting improvement in functional impairment (β3 = 0.70, p < 0.001; indirect effect = -0.23). The direct effect was of medium magnitude (β4 = -0.17, p = 0.04), indicating lurasidone had a significant and direct effect on improvement in functional impairment, after accounting for depression improvement. Results demonstrated statistically significant improvement in functioning among patients on lurasidone monotherapy compared to placebo. Improvement in functioning among patients on lurasidone was largely mediated through a reduction in depression symptoms, but lurasidone also had a medium and statistically significant independent direct effect in improving functioning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Student > Postgraduate 5 18%
Other 4 14%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 11%
Psychology 3 11%
Social Sciences 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,168,495
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#85
of 291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,876
of 301,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,800 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.