ArticleShanghai archives of psychiatry2015
Comparison of the effectiveness of duloxetine in depressed patients with and without a family history of affective disorders in first-degree relatives.
Article in Shanghai archives of psychiatry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and Safety of Morinda Officinalis Oligosaccharides Combined with Probiotics as a Therapeutic Strategy for Major Depressive Disorder with Gastrointestinal Symptoms: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Clinical Trial.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2025Trial
- Neural correlates of RDoC reward constructs in adolescents with diverse psychiatric symptoms: A Reward Flanker Task pilot study.Journal of affective disorders · 2017Article
- Relationship of Mean Platelet Volume To MDD: A Retrospective Study.Shanghai archives of psychiatry · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt remains unclear whether or not a positive family history of affective disorders predicts the effectiveness of antidepressant treatment of depression.
aimsAssess the relationship of a family history of affective disorders to the efficacy of duloxetine in the treatment of depressive disorder.
methodsSeventy-seven patients with depressive disorder (as defined by the 10th edition of the International Classification of Diseases, ICD-10) were enrolled in the study and treated with standard doses of duloxetine for 12 weeks. Among these patients 37 had a family history of affective disorder in first-degree relatives and 40 did not. The Hamilton Depression rating scale (HAMD-17), Hamilton Anxiety rating scale (HAMA), Side Effects Rating Scale (SERS), Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale (SHAPS), and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) were assessed at baseline and at the end of the 2(nd), 4(th), 6(th), 8(th), and 12(th) week after enrollment. Repeated measures analysis of variance and logistic regression were used to analyze the association between a family history of affective disorders and the efficacy of duloxetine.
resultsPatients with a positive family history of affective disorders had an earlier age of onset, a longer duration of illness, a higher level of psychic anxiety, and more prominent anhedonia. Repeated measures analysis of variance showed a significant improvement in the severity of depression over the 12 weeks but no differences in the magnitude or speed of improvement between the two groups. Treatment was considered effective (i.e., drop in baseline HAMD-17 total score of ≥50%) in 75.7% of those with a family history of affective disorders and in 77.5% of those without a family history (X(2)=0.04, p=0.850).
conclusionsFamily history of affective disorders is not associated with the effectiveness of duloxetine in the acute treatment of depressive disorder.
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.