ArticleBMJ open2016
Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: protocol for a network meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 40 of them syntheses 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
101 citing papers in PubMed, 40 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cognitive behavioural therapy compared to control conditions in treating bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of clinical psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Effects of Agomelatine on Sleep Across Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of sleep research · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative gastrointestinal effects of antidepressants for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a network and dose‒response meta-analysis.Translational psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Depressive disorders: systematic review of approved psychiatric medications (2009-April 2025) and pipeline phase 3 medications.BMC psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The efficacy of psychosocial interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer caregivers: a network meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness of statins for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with pulmonary hypertension: systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Combination treatment with acupoint therapy and conventional medication for non-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Pooled it
- Treatment discontinuation of remotely delivered cognitive remediation for schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Antidepressants for pain management in adults with chronic pain: a network meta-analysis.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Pooled it
- ICU patients receiving remifentanil do not experience reduced duration of mechanical ventilation: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials and network meta-analyses based on Bayesian theories.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and acceptability of psilocybin for primary or secondary depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of psychological treatments on functioning in people with Schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2023Pooled it
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of analgesic medicines for adults with acute non-specific low back pain: systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2023Pooled it
- Placebo response in trials with patients with anxiety, obsessive-compulsive and stress disorders across the lifespan: a three-level meta-analysis.BMJ mental health · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pharmacological and dietary-supplement treatments for autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Molecular autism · 2022Pooled it
- Pharmacological treatment for bipolar mania: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials.Molecular psychiatry · 2022Pooled it
- Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Prodromal Stage of Psychosis-Outcomes for Transition, Functioning, Distress, and Quality of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Schizophrenia bulletin · 2022Pooled it
41 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMany antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network meta-analyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethical approval. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42012002291.
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.