Objective: Despite recent advances in neuroscience highlighting its potential applications in the assessment and treatment of psychiatric disorders, the training of psychiatrists in neuroscience is lacking. However, it is not clear to what extent Canadian trainees are interested in further learning and using neuroscience in their daily clinical practice. This study explored the attitudes of Canadian psychiatry trainees with regard to neuroscience education and training by asking them to assess their own understanding of neuroscience and the perceived relevance of neuroscience knowledge to effective psychiatric practice. Methods: An online questionnaire was sent to psychiatry residents at Canadian universities. This questionnaire consisted of self-assessments of neuroscience knowledge, attitudes toward neuroscience education, preferences in learning modalities, and interest in specific neuroscience topics. Results: One hundred and eleven psychiatry residents from psychiatry residency programs at Canadian universities responded to this survey. Participants represented trainees from all 5 years of residency. Almost half of all trainees (49.0%) reported their knowledge of neuroscience to be either “inadequate” or “less than adequate,” and only 14.7% of trainees reported that they feel “comfortable” or “very comfortable” discussing neuroscience findings with their patients. 63.7% of Canadian trainees rated the quantity of neuroscience education in their residency program as either less than adequate or inadequate, and 46.1% rated the quality of their neuroscience education as “poor” or “very poor.” The vast majority of participants (>70%) felt that additional neuroscience education would be moderately-to-hugely helpful in finding personalized treatments, discovering future treatments, destigmatizing patients with psychiatric illness, and understanding mental illness. Conclusions: Canadian trainees generally feel that their neuroscience knowledge and the neuroscience education they receive during their psychiatry residencies is inadequate. However, as the first step for any change, the majority of future Canadian psychiatrists are very motivated and have a positive attitude toward neuroscience learning.

Aim: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is widely utilized as an effective treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) with varying response rates. Factors associated with better treatment outcome remain scarce. This naturalistic retrospective chart review hopes to shed light on easily obtainable and measurable predictive factors for patients referred to rTMS.Methods: Protocol parameters, medication, rated scales, rTMS protocols, and treatment outcomes were reviewed for 196 patients with MDD who received rTMS at Saint Boniface Hospital between 2013 and 2019. Logistic regression and marginal effects were used to assess the different predictor variables for response (50% reduction or more on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (Ham-D)) and remission (Ham-D of ≤7 by the last session).Results: HamD at 10 sessions was predictive of remission, and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) at 10 sessions was predictive of response to rTMS. Ham-D, SDS, and Beck Anxiety Inventory were predictive of remission and response by Beck Anxiety Inventory 20 sessions. High frequency rTMS had a similar response and remission rate to low frequency, but higher response rate to intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation with no difference in remission rate. Positive predictive factors of response were lower age and bupropion use. Negative predictive factors were antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, or benzodiazepine use. For remission, antipsychotics or anticonvulsants use were negative predictors; bupropion use and higher resting motor threshold were positive predictors. Severity of depression as measured by baseline HamD was not associated with different probabilities of treatment success.