ArticleBJPsych open2020
What do we know about long-term treatment outcomes for severe depressive disorders?
Article in BJPsych open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmentation and combination treatments for early-stage treatment-resistant depression.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2023Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of treatments for rapid cycling bipolar disorder.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2022Pooled it
- Care pathways for people with major depressive disorder: a European Brain Council Value of Treatment study.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a recent issue of BJPsych Open, McPherson & Hengartner (see https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2019.65) reviewed 11 trials examining psychological and pharmacological treatment outcomes for chronic or treatment-resistant depression. They concluded that when assessed in the long term, antidepressants become less effective whereas psychological therapies become more effective. We argue that the evidence does not support this; indeed, most of the studies reviewed do not directly compare antidepressant with psychological therapy treatments and there is little consistency between them in terms of populations and interventions examined. The issue of long-term outcomes is key for optimising clinical guidelines and deserves more intensive research and scrutiny to improve patient response in routine practice.
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.