The goal of this study was to examine the sensory profile (expressed as hypersensitivity or hyposensitivity) of patients with major affective disorders and its relative contribution to the prediction of sleep quality while considering affective temperaments and depression, which may impact sleep quality. We recruited 176 participants (mean age, 47.3 y), of whom 56.8% had a diagnosis of unipolar major depressive disorder and 43.2% a diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Reduced sleep quality was evaluated using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Affective temperaments were assessed using the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego. Sensory hypersensitivity, assessed using the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile, significantly distinguished between poor and good sleepers. Sleep quality was mainly predicted by the Beck Depression Inventory-II total score and anxious temperament. Sensory hypersensitivity contributed to this prediction mainly with regard to sleep efficiency and related daytime dysfunction.
The auditory P300 response and smooth pursuit eye tracking were recorded from a group of 23 male adult subjects who had been diagnosed in childhood as having schizoid personality. No differences were found in these physiological measures between the study group, their matched controls of other child psychiatric patients, and a group of population controls. The essentially negative findings are discussed in the light of abnormalities of these psychophysiological responses previously found in schizophrenic patients, in some of their biological relatives, and in other groups of psychiatric patients, including autistic children and adults with a diagnosis of borderline and schizotypal personality disorder. Results suggest that "schizoid" children, despite their high scores on a measure of schizotypy, do not have schizophrenia spectrum disorder or that schizotypy is a heterogeneous condition.
See article by Zhou et al I n this issue of JCP, Zhou and colleagues 1 review and integrate placebo-controlled efficacy trials of medications for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) to compare efficacy in a meta-analysis. They conclude that, among 11 augmentation options for TRD, aripiprazole and quetiapine have the most robust evidence for efficacy, with the caveats that these treatments carry substantial risks of adverse events and no long-term data are available. In the absence of direct comparisons, this exercise highlights the formidable challenges that clinicians face when making decisions. While Zhou and colleagues 1 provide an excellent analysis of the available data, we will argue that these findings are of limited use for most people receiving and providing care for TRD. As stated by Tricoci and colleagues in commenting on guidelines in cardiology, "the current system generating research is inadequate to satisfy the information needs of caregivers and patients in determining benefits and risks of drugs, devices, and procedures. " 2(p837) It is not just in psychiatry that we lack evidence for most clinical decisions. We need a new research paradigm beyond meta-analyses of efficacy studies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.