Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21479739›Full record

ArticleDer Nervenarzt2011

[Is there evidence that depression screening benefits patients with medical illness?: not yet].

B D Thombs, A Körner

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

B D ThombsDepartments of Psychiatry/Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health/Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Kanada. brett.thombs@mcgill.ca
A Körner

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Depression is increasingly recognized as a common and disabling condition, and improving depression care has been prioritized by policy-makers in Germany and elsewhere. Screening for depression, which refers to the routine use of depression screening tools or sets of questions to identify patients who may have depression, but whose depression is otherwise not recognized by their physician, is one solution that has been proposed. However, there has never been a clinical trial that has found better depression outcomes for patients screened for depression compared to patients not screened when the same treatment and care resources are made available to both groups. There are, on the other hand, many negative trials that have failed to find benefit to patients from depression screening. Thus, depression screening has not been shown to benefit patients, may lead to important harm, and would consume a substantial amount of scarce resources. Prior to recommending that physicians routinely screen patients for depression, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed that compare depression outcomes for patients screened versus patients not screened with the same treatment options available to both screened and non-screened patients.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineDepressionHumansMass ScreeningTreatment Outcome

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.