Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25919841›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of clinical psychiatry2015

Comparative efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of augmentation agents in treatment-resistant depression: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Xinyu Zhou, Arun V Ravindran, Bin Qin, Cinzia Del Giovane, Qi Li, Michael Bauer, Yiyun Liu, Yiru Fang, Tricia da Silva, Yuqing Zhang and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudySystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of clinical psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
19.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 179 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pharmacological Augmentation in Unipolar Depression: A Guide to the Guidelines.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2020
    Pooled it
  7. Pharmacological interventions for treatment-resistant depression in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Psychedelics in treatment-resistant depression: a comprehensive review of mechanisms, clinical evidence, and recommendations.Neuropsychiatrie : Klinik, Diagnostik, Therapie und Rehabilitation : Organ der Gesellschaft Osterreichischer Nervenarzte und Psychiater · 2026
    Review

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xinyu ZhouDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing.
Arun V Ravindran
Bin Qin
Cinzia Del Giovane
Qi Li
Michael Bauer
Yiyun Liu
Yiru Fang
Tricia da Silva
Yuqing Zhang
Liang Fang
Xiao Wang
Peng Xie
First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo comparatively analyze the efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of various augmentation agents in adult patients with treatment-resistant depression. DATA SOURCES: An electronic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EBSCO, PsycINFO, EAGLE, and NTIS for trials published up to December 2013 was conducted. Several clinical trial registry agencies and US Food and Drug Administration reports were also reviewed. No language, publication date, or publication status restrictions were imposed. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized controlled trials comparing 11 augmentation agents (aripiprazole, bupropion, buspirone, lamotrigine, lithium, methylphenidate, olanzapine, pindolol, quetiapine, risperidone, and thyroid hormone) with each other and with placebo for adult treatment-resistant depression were included. DATA EXTRACTION: The proportion of patients who responded to treatment was defined as primary efficacy, and the proportion of all-cause discontinuation and side-effects discontinuation were respectively defined as acceptability and tolerability, which were assessed with odds ratios (ORs) and a Bayesian random-effects model with 95% credible intervals (CrIs).

resultsA total of 48 trials consisting of 6,654 participants were eligible. In terms of the primary efficacy, quetiapine (OR = 1.92; 95% CrI, 1.39-3.13), aripiprazole (OR = 1.85; 95% CrI, 1.27-2.27), thyroid hormone (OR = 1.84; 95% CrI, 1.06-3.56), and lithium (OR = 1.56; 95% CrI, 1.05-2.55) were significantly more effective than placebo. Sensitivity analyses indicated that efficacy estimates for aripiprazole and quetiapine were more robust than those for thyroid hormone and lithium. In terms of acceptability, no significant difference was found between active agents and placebo. In terms of tolerability, compared to placebo, quetiapine (OR = 3.85; 95% CrI, 1.92-8.33), olanzapine (OR = 3.36; 95% CrI, 1.60-8.61), aripiprazole (OR = 2.51; 95% CrI, 1.11-7.69), and lithium (OR = 2.30; 95% CrI, 1.04-6.03) were significantly less well tolerated.

conclusionsQuetiapine and aripiprazole appear to be the most robust evidence-based options for augmentation therapy in patients with treatment-resistant depression, but clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously in light of the evidence of potential treatment-related side effects.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsDepressive Disorder, Treatment-ResistantMajor Depressive DisorderPatient Acceptance of Health CareAdultDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntidepressive Agents

Identifiers

PMID25919841
OpenAlexW2033726468

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.