ReviewEuropean psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists2020
Trends in (not) using scales in major depression: A categorization and clinical orientation.
Review in European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Global prevalence and factors associated with preoperative depression in women undergoing breast surgery: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of venlafaxine hydrochloride combined with tandospirone citrate for patients with vascular depression accompanied by somatic symptoms: An open-labeled randomized control trial.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Trial
- Sertraline for the Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in the US: Effectiveness and Acceptability in Real-World Practice.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2026Article
- Central alterations of brain networks in patients with optic neuritis: a resting state fMRI study.International journal of ophthalmology · 2025Article
- The perspective and experiences of significant others on electroconvulsive therapy.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Phase-Based Care in Community Mental Health: A Cost-Effective Innovation Using Algorithms, Rating Scales and Treatment Teams for Depression Management.Community mental health journal · 2024Observational
- Potential value of gastrointestinal myoelectrical activity in the diagnosis of anxiety-depression disorder: a population-based study.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- A factor analytic comparison of three commonly used depression scales (HAMD, MADRS, BDI) in a large sample of depressed inpatients.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Optimizing multi-domain hematologic biomarkers and clinical features for the differential diagnosis of unipolar depression and bipolar depression.Npj mental health research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStandard depression rating scales like the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale were developed more than 40 years ago. They are mandatory in clinical trials but are for a variety of reasons seldom used in clinical practice. Moreover, most clinicians are less familiar with more recent trends or with some dilemmas in assessment tools for major depression.
methodsNarrative review.
resultsAsssessment tools can be observer-rating or self-rating scales, disease-specific or non-disease-specific scales, subjective scales or objective lab assessments, standard questionnaires or experience sampling methods. An overarching question is to what degree current assessment methods really address the individual patient's needs and treatment expectations.
conclusionsThe present paper aims to offer a framework for understanding the current trends in assessment tools that can orientate and guide the clinician.
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.