Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15960555›Full record

ReviewPharmacoEconomics2005

Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of antidepressants : a critical appraisal of methods.

Sheikh Usman Iqbal, Mark Prashker

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in PharmacoEconomics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. A proposed model for economic evaluations of major depressive disorder.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2012
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sheikh Usman IqbalHealth Outcomes Technologies Program, Health Services Department, Boston University School of Public Health, and Center for the Assessment of Pharmaceutical Practices (CAPPs), Boston, Massachusetts 02118, USA. usman@bu.edu
Mark Prashker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, there has been much debate regarding the real cost effectiveness of new antidepressants. This review is an attempt to identify key contentious methodological issues that can impact the reliability, validity and quality of the research on this subject. There are inherent complexities between inputs and outcomes related to depression, and the choice of pharmacoeconomic methodology requires a crucial balance between the study design and its ability to capture relevant information. Knowledge of the real efficiency of antidepressants should always be ascertained with reference to the real-world setting. Studies that show a corresponding balance between internal and external validity, coupled with sound methodology and standardised reporting, have the potential to translate pharmacoeconomics research into real-world, time-relevant decision-making.

Indexed as

Economics, PharmaceuticalAntidepressive AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisDepressionHumansReproducibility of ResultsTreatment OutcomeAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.