ArticleNeurology and therapy2019
Adapting the Goal Attainment Approach for Major Depressive Disorder.
Article in Neurology and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- A survey of patient-physician communication regarding treatment prospects and goal setting in the management of major depressive disorder in Japan.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Goal Attainment Scaling in Patients With Burning Mouth Syndrome: A Real-World Clinical Study Protocol.Cureus · 2024Article
- Characteristics of goal-setting tools in adult rehabilitation: A scoping review.Clinical rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Goal Attainment Scaling for Depression: Validation of the Japanese GAS-D Tool in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2024Article
- Treatment-resistant depression: definition, prevalence, detection, management, and investigational interventions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2023Article
- Observational
- Design and Implementation of a Digitally Enabled Care Pathway to Improve Management of Depression in a Large Health Care System: Protocol for the Implementation of a Patient Care Platform.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Assessing Reliability and Validity of the Oxford Depression Questionnaire (ODQ) in a Japanese Clinical Population.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2023Article
- Is There Room for Individual Patient-Specified Preferences in the Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Revolution?Journal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2023Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for patient-centered care has become a focal point of healthcare improvement initiatives. Shared decision making-in which patients and clinicians communicate about various treatment options and goals and patient input is considered when making treatment decisions-has been associated with improved health and quality of life. A method of treatment evaluation allowing incorporation of patient-specific goals and perspectives is of increasing interest to healthcare providers, payers, and patients. An approach that allows incorporation of shared goal setting is possible via use of an instrument called the Goal Attainment Scale (GAS). This scale provides the structure for measuring progress toward treatment goals set through patient-clinician collaboration. The goal attainment approach has been used as a primary outcomes measure in numerous studies but not in major depressive disorder (MDD). As MDD is a complex, multidimensional disorder affecting each patient differently, the use of GAS methodology is a relevant framework for setting personalized meaningful treatment goals. Initial research into the feasibility of using the GAS in MDD (GAS-D) to measure patient-centric outcomes that may be neglected when more traditional scales are used has been encouraging. The objective of this Commentary is to provide background and rationale for implementation of the GAS-D in clinical practice.Funding Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Ltd., and Lundbeck LLC.
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.