• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

information for practice

news, new scholarship & more from around the world


advanced search
  • gary.holden@nyu.edu
  • @ Info4Practice
  • Archive
  • About
  • Help
  • Browse Key Journals
  • RSS Feeds

Predicting Response to Pro‐Cognitive Interventions in Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Targeting Cognition Task Force

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.

Read the full article ›

Posted in: Meta-analyses - Systematic Reviews on 11/19/2025 | Link to this post on IFP |
Share

Primary Sidebar

Categories

Category RSS Feeds

  • Calls & Consultations
  • Clinical Trials
  • Funding
  • Grey Literature
  • Guidelines Plus
  • History
  • Infographics
  • Journal Article Abstracts
  • Meta-analyses - Systematic Reviews
  • Monographs & Edited Collections
  • News
  • Open Access Journal Articles
  • Podcasts
  • Video

© 1993-2025 Dr. Gary Holden. All rights reserved.

gary.holden@nyu.edu
@Info4Practice