Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17998951›Full record

ArticlePrimary care companion to the Journal of clinical psychiatry2007

Translating Science Into Service: Lessons Learned From the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Study.

Norman Sussman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Primary care companion to the Journal of clinical psychiatry, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

1 author.

Norman SussmanDepartment of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, N.Y, USA. sussman01@aol.com

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this review is to summarize lessons learned from, and limitations of, the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial, focusing on measurement-based care. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and MEDLINE were searched from 1980 through 2006 using terms such as depression, major depressive disorder, augmentation, switching, measurement-based care, and remission. Other relevant articles were identified by checking reference lists of the identified studies. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 60 studies were initially identified, which resulted in 34 studies used in this review. The salient criteria used for selection of studies centered on whether results had implications for clinical practice and provided lessons that could be learned and practically applied to real-life settings. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from the STAR*D trial and associated studies that were pertinent to everyday problems encountered by mental health professionals in the community: determination of whether the optimum strategy for a particular patient involves "augmentation" or "switching" of a patient's medication. DATA SYNTHESIS: Measurement-based care is essential in order to identify the two thirds of patients who do not achieve remission with the first treatment strategy. Timely changes in antidepressant therapy can improve outcomes.

conclusionsThe STAR*D trial underscores the importance of measurement-based care in identifying patients who may not have achieved remission with an initial antidepressant, enabling alternative options such as augmentation or switching to be prescribed to meet this ultimate goal of therapy.

Identifiers

PMID17998951
PMCPMC2040279

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.