Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2008
Primary care management of major depression in patients aged > or =55 years: outcome of a randomised clinical trial.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of late-life depression interventions on functional limitations: A systematic review.International journal of mental health nursing · 2022Pooled it
- Utility scores for different health states related to depression: individual participant data analysis.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2017Pooled it
- Psychosocial interventions for late-life major depression: evidence-based treatments, predictors of treatment outcomes, and moderators of treatment effects.The Psychiatric clinics of North America · 2011Pooled it
- Propensity score to detect baseline imbalance in cluster randomized trials: the role of the c-statistic.BMC medical research methodology · 2016Article
- Course, risk factors, and prognostic factors in elderly primary care patients with mild depression: a two-year observational study.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2013Article
- How usual is usual care in pragmatic intervention studies in primary care? An overview of recent trials.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2010Article
- Preventing bias in cluster randomised trials.PLoS medicine · 2009Article
- Is personal care important in the diagnosis of depression in older people?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLate-life depression is associated with chronic illness, disability, and a poor prognosis. Primary care management may be in need of improvement.
aimTo compare the effects of an intervention programme that aims to improve the identification, diagnosis, and treatment of depression in patients aged > or =55 years with the effects of usual care. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cluster randomised controlled trial.
settingGeneral practices in the Netherlands.
methodTrained GPs performed the intervention and their practice assistants conducted the screenings. Patients were screened with the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15) and given a consultation with the GP who diagnosed depression with the mood module of the Primary Care Evaluation of Mental Disorders (PRIME-MD). Antidepressant treatment was proposed. Primary outcomes were measured with the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Trained independent research assistants performed independent evaluations in both arms.
resultsEighteen practices (23 GPs) were allocated to the intervention and 16 practices (20 GPs) to usual care. From June 2000 to September 2002, 3937 patients were screened; 579 patients had a positive score on the GDS-15, 178 had major depression, of whom 145 participated in the trial. MADRS scores for the intervention group dropped from 21.66 at baseline to 9.23 at 6 months, and the usual care group from 20.94 at baseline to 11.45 at 6 months. MADRS scores decreased during the year in both arms. For the intervention group, these scores increased between 6 and 12 months.
conclusionThe programme resulted in lower MADRS scores in the intervention group than in the usual care group, but only at the end of the intervention, at 6 months after baseline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.