ArticleNeuropsychiatric disease and treatment2015
Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of vilazodone for treating major depressive disorder.
Article in Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Depressive disorders: systematic review of approved psychiatric medications (2009-April 2025) and pipeline phase 3 medications.BMC psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Antidepressant effect ofThe Libyan journal of medicine · 2020Article
- Vilazodone for the Treatment of Depression: An Update.Chonnam medical journal · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVilazodone is a novel serotonin (5-HT)-reuptake inhibitor and 5-HT1A partial agonist that was recently developed for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to better evaluate the efficacy and safety of vilazodone. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a thorough literature search to identify all randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials that were designed to investigate the efficacy of vilazodone for the treatment of MDD, and that were published in electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. A manual search was also conducted to investigate the relevant references of the retrieved studies. Subsequently, we conducted a meta-analysis and systematic literature review.
resultsA total of five randomized controlled trials were finally included, involving 1,200 patients with vilazodone and 1,193 patients with placebo. The primary efficacy end point of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (standardized mean difference -3.58, 95% confidence interval -4.59 to -2.56; P<0.00001), and the key secondary efficacy end points (Clinical Global Impression - Severity scale, Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale, and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale) indicated that vilazodone was more effective than placebo. Most common adverse events, including diarrhea and nausea, were evaluated, and safety assessments indicated that vilazodone was well tolerated (diarrhea odds ratio 3.54, 95% confidence interval 2.81-4.45; P<0.00001; nausea odds ratio 3.85, 95% confidence interval 3.00-4.96; P<0.00001; discontinuations due to adverse events odds ratio 2.71, 95% confidence interval 1.81-4.05; P<0.00001).
conclusionOur findings indicate that the novel antidepressant vilazodone is effective and safe for MDD, with a low occurrence of side effects. It offers promise as an effective oral drug for the treatment of MDD, with a balance of efficacy and tolerability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.