Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20123821›Full record

Trial reportPsychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)2010

Advantages of using estimated depression-free days for evaluating treatment efficacy.

Steven D Vannoy, Patricia Arean, Jürgen Unützer

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Collaborative care for depression and anxiety problems.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Effects of an adolescent depression prevention program on maternal criticisms and positive remarks.Journal of family psychology : JFP : journal of the Division of Family Psychology of the American Psychological Association (Division 43) · 2020
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Cost-effectiveness analysis of collaborative care management of major depression among low-income, predominantly Hispanics with diabetes.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
    Trial
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Steven D VannoyDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, 1959 N.E. Pacific St., Box 356560, BB1533, Seattle, WA 98195-6560, USA. svannoy@u.washington.edu
Patricia Arean
Jürgen Unützer

Funding

Institute for Translational Health Science (KL2)KL2RR025015 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI DISIS, MARY L. · 2007 to 2011
$9.3M
Treating Depression in Low-Income Elderly with CIND/AMCIK24MH074717 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI AREAN, PATRICIA A. · 2005 to 2016
$1.7M
NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR025015NCRR NIH HHS KL2RR025015NIMH NIH HHS 5K24MH074717NIMH NIH HHS K24 MH074717
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSeveral common methods for measuring treatment response present a snapshot of depression symptoms. The construct of estimated depression-free days (DFDs) simultaneously captures treatment outcome and estimates the patient's experience of depression over time. The study compared this measure with traditional measures used in depression treatment research.

methodsThis secondary data analysis was based on data from the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment trial, a multisite depression treatment study conducted in 18 primary care clinics in five states and representing eight health care systems. The sample of older adults (N=906) had been randomly assigned to receive collaborative care for depression. Participants were aged 60 or older and met criteria for major depressive disorder, dysthymia, or both. Exclusion criteria included severe cognitive impairment, active substance abuse, active suicidal behavior, severe mental illness, and active treatment from a psychiatrist. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-20) were used as outcome measures at four assessment points (baseline, three months, six months, and 12 months). Outcomes were computed for relative change, standardized differences, the proportion of improvement in depression, and DFDs.

resultsUsing four assessment points improved the agreement between DFDs and the course of symptom change between pre- and posttest measures.

conclusionsThe DFD is a valid measure for estimating treatment outcomes that reflects the course of symptom change over time. When multiple assessments were conducted between the pre- and posttest periods, DFDs incorporated additional data yet remained easily interpreted. The DFD should be considered for reporting outcomes in depression research.

Indexed as

AffectCooperative BehaviorPatient Care TeamPrimary Health CareAgedDysthymic DisorderFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePersonality InventoryPsychometricsQuality of Life

Identifiers

PMID20123821
PMCPMC3049453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.