Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26576188›Full record

ReviewDrugs in context2015

Antidepressant efficacy and side-effect burden: a quick guide for clinicians.

Daniel Santarsieri, Thomas L Schwartz

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drugs in context, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 91 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
91citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

91 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 216 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. ATP Release Deficiency through Astrocytic Connexin 43 in the Dorsal Hippocampus Promotes Depressive- and Anxiety-Like Behaviors.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

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

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel SantarsieriDepartment of Psychiatry, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA.
Thomas L SchwartzDepartment of Psychiatry, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, USA.
SUNY Upstate Medical University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prescribing of antidepressant treatment (ADT) for major depressive disorder (MDD) has increased in quantity and popularity over the last two decades. This is likely due to the approval of safer medications, better education of clinicians and their patients, direct-to-consumer marketing practices, and less stigma associated with those taking ADT. This trend has also been met with some controversy, however, as the ongoing safety and effectiveness of these treatments have at times been called into question. This paper discusses the differing levels of evidence that support the use of ADT based on (A) Food and Drug Administration approvals, (B) data from randomized controlled trials or meta-analyses and, where these are not available, the authors discuss and apply, (C) theoretical pharmacodynamic principles to justify antidepressant choice in the treatment of MDD patients. The final section discusses standard psychopharmacology guideline approaches to better alert the reader as to which practices are commonplace compared with those which are more outside of the standard of care.

Indexed as

antidepressantsdepressioneffectivenessefficacypharmacodynamicspharmacotherapypsychotropicssafety

Identifiers

PMID26576188
PMCPMC4630974
OpenAlexW2412843828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.