Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20091586›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Sertraline versus other antidepressive agents for depression.

Andrea Cipriani, Teresa La Ferla, Toshi A Furukawa, Alessandra Signoretti, Atsuo Nakagawa, Rachel Churchill, Hugh McGuire, Corrado Barbui

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Behavioural activation therapy for depression in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  5. Duloxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andrea CiprianiDepartment of Medicine and Public Health, Section of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology, University of Verona, Policlinico "G.B.Rossi", Piazzale L.A. Scuro, 10, Verona, Italy, 37134.
Teresa La Ferla
Toshi A Furukawa
Alessandra Signoretti
Atsuo Nakagawa
Rachel Churchill
Hugh McGuire
Corrado Barbui
University of Verona · ITKeio University · JPNagoya City University · JPUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence clinical practice guideline on the treatment of depressive disorder recommended that selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors should be the first-line option when drug therapy is indicated for a depressive episode. Preliminary evidence suggested that sertraline might be slightly superior in terms of effectiveness.

objectivesTo assess the evidence for the efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of sertraline in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), heterocyclics, other SSRIs and newer agents in the acute-phase treatment of major depression. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE (1966 to 2008), EMBASE (1974 to 2008), the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2008. No language restriction was applied. Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were hand-searched. Pharmaceutical companies and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials allocating patients with major depression to sertraline versus any other antidepressive agent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved with another member of the team. A double-entry procedure was employed by two reviewers. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and outcome measures in terms of efficacy (the number of patients who responded or remitted), acceptability (the number of patients who failed to complete the study) and tolerability (side-effects). MAIN

resultsA total of 59 studies, mostly of low quality, were included in the review, involving multiple treatment comparisons between sertraline and other antidepressant agents. Evidence favouring sertraline over some other antidepressants for the acute phase treatment of major depression was found, either in terms of efficacy (fluoxetine) or acceptability/tolerability (amitriptyline, imipramine, paroxetine and mirtazapine). However, some differences favouring newer antidepressants in terms of efficacy (mirtazapine) and acceptability (bupropion) were also found. In terms of individual side effects, sertraline was generally associated with a higher rate of participants experiencing diarrhoea. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis highlighted a trend in favour of sertraline over other antidepressive agents both in terms of efficacy and acceptability, using 95% confidence intervals and a conservative approach, with a random effects analysis. However, the included studies did not report on all the outcomes that were pre-specified in the protocol of this review. Outcomes of clear relevance to patients and clinicians were not reported in any of the included studies.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsDepressionHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertralineTreatment OutcomeAntidepressive AgentsSelective Serotonin Reuptake InhibitorsSertraline

Identifiers

PMID20091586
OpenAlexW4235934435

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.