Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25837277›Full record

Trial reportPhytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology2015

Rhodiola rosea versus sertraline for major depressive disorder: A randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Jun J Mao, Sharon X Xie, Jarcy Zee, Irene Soeller, Qing S Li, Kenneth Rockwell, Jay D Amsterdam

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Efficacy and safety of three species ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Non-Invasive Imaging for the Evaluation of a New Oral Supplement in Skin Aging: A Case-Controlled Study.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI)
    Trial
  10. [Herbal treatment options for post-viral symptoms and long COVID].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2026
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Frontiers in nutrition · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Comprehensive profiling ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Mixture ofNutrients · 2024
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Depression and Its Phytopharmacotherapy-A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jun J MaoDepartment of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States. Electronic address: jun.mao@uphs.upenn.edu.
Sharon X XieDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Jarcy ZeeDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Irene SoellerDepartment of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Depression Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Qing S LiDepartment of Family Medicine & Community Health, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States; Depression Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Kenneth RockwellInvestigational Drug Service, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Jay D AmsterdamDepression Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
University of Pennsylvania · US

Funding

Elucidating the placebo effects of acupuncture: hot flashes as a clinical modelK23AT004112 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAO, JUN J · 2008 to 2012
$659k
Rhodiola rosea Therapy of Major Depressive DisorderR21AT005230 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MAO, JUN J · 2010 to 2012
$636k
NCCIH NIH HHS 21AT005230NCCIH NIH HHS K23 AT004112NCCIH NIH HHS K23AT004112NCCIH NIH HHS R21 AT005230
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a proof of concept trial to evaluate relative safety and efficacy of Rhodiola rosea (R. rosea) versus sertraline for mild to moderate major depressive disorder. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that R. rosea would have similar therapeutic effects as sertraline but with less adverse events. STUDY

designPhase II randomized placebo controlled clinical trial.

methods57 subjects were randomized to 12 weeks of standardized R. rosea extract, sertraline, or placebo. Changes over time in Hamilton Depression Rating (HAM-D), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Clinical Global Impression Change (CGI/C) scores among groups were examined using mixed-effects models.

resultsModest, albeit statistically non-significant, reductions were observed for HAM-D, BDI, and CGI/C scores for all treatment conditions with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.79, p = 0.28, and p = 0.17, respectively). The decline in HAM-D scores was greater for sertraline (-8.2, 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.7 to -3.6) versus R. rosea (-5.1, 95% CI: -8.8 to -1.3) and placebo (-4.6, 95% CI: -8.6 to -0.6). While the odds of improving (versus placebo) were greater for sertraline (1.90 [0.44-8.20]; odds ratio [95% CI]) than R. rosea (1.39 [0.38-5.04]), more subjects on sertraline reported adverse events (63.2%) than R. rosea (30.0%) or placebo (16.7%) (p = 0.012).

conclusionsAlthough R. rosea produced less antidepressant effect versus sertraline, it also resulted in significantly fewer adverse events and was better tolerated. These findings suggest that R. rosea, although less effective than sertraline, may possess a more favorable risk to benefit ratio for individuals with mild to moderate depression.

Indexed as

AdultAntidepressive AgentsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMiddle AgedPhytotherapyPlant ExtractsPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesRhodiolaSertralineAntidepressive AgentsPlant ExtractsSertralineBotanical psychopharmacologyComplementary and alternative medicineDepressionRhodiola roseaSertraline

Identifiers

PMID25837277
PMCPMC4385215
OpenAlexW1994101653

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.