39
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Systematic Review of Comparative Efficacy of Treatments and Controls for Depression

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Although previous meta-analyses have examined effects of antidepressants, psychotherapy, and alternative therapies for depression, the efficacy of these treatments alone and in combination has not been systematically compared. We hypothesized that the differences between approved depression treatments and controls would be small.

          Methods and Findings

          The authors first reviewed data from Food and Drug Administration Summary Basis of Approval reports of 62 pivotal antidepressant trials consisting of data from 13,802 depressed patients. This was followed by a systematic review of data from 115 published trials evaluating efficacy of psychotherapies and alternative therapies for depression. The published depression trials consisted of 10,310 depressed patients. We assessed the percentage symptom reduction experienced by the patients based on treatment assignment. Overall, antidepressants led to greater symptom reduction compared to placebo among both unpublished FDA data and published trials ( F = 38.5, df = 239, p<0.001). In the published trials we noted that the magnitude of symptom reduction with active depression treatments compared to controls was significantly larger when raters evaluating treatment effects were un-blinded compared to the trials with blinded raters ( F = 2.17, df = 313, p<0.05). In the blinded trials, the combination of antidepressants and psychotherapy provided a slight advantage over antidepressants ( p = 0.027) and psychotherapy ( p = 0.022) alone. The magnitude of symptom reduction was greater with psychotherapies compared to placebo ( p = 0.019), treatment-as-usual ( p = 0.012) and waiting-list ( p<0.001). Differences were not seen with psychotherapy compared to antidepressants, alternative therapies or active intervention controls.

          Conclusions

          In conclusion, the combination of psychotherapy and antidepressants for depression may provide a slight advantage whereas antidepressants alone and psychotherapy alone are not significantly different from alternative therapies or active intervention controls. These data suggest that type of treatment offered is less important than getting depressed patients involved in an active therapeutic program. Future research should consider whether certain patient profiles might justify a specific treatment modality.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The effects of psychotherapy for adult depression are overestimated: a meta-analysis of study quality and effect size.

          No meta-analytical study has examined whether the quality of the studies examining psychotherapy for adult depression is associated with the effect sizes found. This study assesses this association. We used a database of 115 randomized controlled trials in which 178 psychotherapies for adult depression were compared to a control condition. Eight quality criteria were assessed by two independent coders: participants met diagnostic criteria for a depressive disorder, a treatment manual was used, the therapists were trained, treatment integrity was checked, intention-to-treat analyses were used, N >or= 50, randomization was conducted by an independent party, and assessors of outcome were blinded. Only 11 studies (16 comparisons) met the eight quality criteria. The standardized mean effect size found for the high-quality studies (d=0.22) was significantly smaller than in the other studies (d=0.74, p<0.001), even after restricting the sample to the subset of other studies that used the kind of care-as-usual or non-specific controls that tended to be used in the high-quality studies. Heterogeneity was zero in the group of high-quality studies. The numbers needed to be treated in the high-quality studies was 8, while it was 2 in the lower-quality studies. We found strong evidence that the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression have been overestimated in meta-analytical studies. Although the effects of psychotherapy are significant, they are much smaller than was assumed until now, even after controlling for the type of control condition used.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Evidence b(i)ased medicine--selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications.

            To investigate the relative impact on publication bias caused by multiple publication, selective publication, and selective reporting in studies sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. 42 placebo controlled studies of five selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors submitted to the Swedish drug regulatory authority as a basis for marketing approval for treating major depression were compared with the studies actually published (between 1983 and 1999). Multiple publication: 21 studies contributed to at least two publications each, and three studies contributed to five publications. Selective publication: studies showing significant effects of drug were published as stand alone publications more often than studies with non-significant results. Selective reporting: many publications ignored the results of intention to treat analyses and reported the more favourable per protocol analyses only. The degree of multiple publication, selective publication, and selective reporting differed between products. Thus, any attempt to recommend a specific selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor from the publicly available data only is likely to be based on biased evidence.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Research diagnostic criteria: rationale and reliability.

              A crucial problem in psychiatry, affecting clinical work as well as research, is the generally low reliability of current psychiatric diagnostic procedures. This article describes the development and initial reliability studies of a set of specific diagnostic criteria for a selected group of functional psychiatric disorders, the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC). The RDC are being widely used to study a variety of research issues, particularly those related to genetics, psychobiology of selected mental disorders, and treatment outcome. The data presented here indicate high reliability for diagnostic judgments made using these criteria.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2012
                30 July 2012
                : 7
                : 7
                : e41778
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Northwest Clinical Research Center, Bellevue, Washington, United States of America
                [2 ]Department of Psychiatry, Duke University Medical School, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
                [3 ]Herzog Hospital, and the School of Medicine of the Hebrew University, Department of Psychiatry, Jerusalem, Israel
                [4 ]Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                [5 ]University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United Kingdom
                [6 ]Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America
                [7 ]Department of Psychiatry, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America
                University of Ulster, United Kingdom
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: AK JF PL IK WAB. Performed the experiments: AK JF IK. Analyzed the data: AK JF. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: AK. Wrote the paper: AK JF PL IK WAB.

                Article
                PONE-D-12-08946
                10.1371/journal.pone.0041778
                3408478
                22860015
                9b03b6fe-bcba-4716-98a1-42d8a58f762a
                Copyright @ 2012

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 26 March 2012
                : 25 June 2012
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Funding
                The authors have no support or funding to report.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine
                Clinical Research Design
                Systematic Reviews
                Drugs and Devices
                Drug Research and Development
                Mental Health
                Psychiatry
                Mood Disorders
                Psychology
                Clinical Psychology
                Therapies
                Drug Psychotherapy
                Psychotherapy
                Social and Behavioral Sciences
                Psychology
                Therapies
                Drug Psychotherapy

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article