ArticleJournal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England)2022
Patient perspectives of lithium and quetiapine augmentation treatment in treatment-resistant depression: A qualitative assessment.
Article in Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative evaluation of multiple treatment regimens for treatment-resistant depression.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical and cost-effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine augmentation for treatment-resistant depression in adults: LQD a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025Trial
- A qualitative exploration of perspectives on taking lithium supplements.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Lithium Augmentation in Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Qualitative Review of the Literature.Pharmacotherapy · 2025Review
- A Survey Exploring People's Experiences With Lithium Bought as a Supplement: Une enquête sur l'expérience des personnes avec le lithium en supplément.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2025Article
- Commentary on the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments 2023 Clinical Guidelines for Management of Major Depressive Disorder in Adults - Capturing the State of the Art.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2024Article
- Lithium: how low can you go?International journal of bipolar disorders · 2024Article
- Treatment-resistant depression: definition, prevalence, detection, management, and investigational interventions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 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
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTreatment-resistant depression (TRD) has a profound cost to patients and healthcare services worldwide. Pharmacological augmentation is one therapeutic option for TRD, with lithium and quetiapine currently recommended as first-line agents. Patient opinions about pharmacological augmentation may affect treatment outcomes, yet these have not been systematically explored.
aimsThis study aimed to qualitatively assess patient experiences of lithium and quetiapine augmentation.
methodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 32 patients from the ongoing lithium versus quetiapine open-label trial comparing these augmentation agents in patients with TRD. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed and a thematic analysis was used to assess patient opinions of each agent.
resultsFour main themes were generated from the thematic analysis: 'Initial concerns', 'Experience of side effects', 'Perception of treatment efficacy' and 'Positive perception of treatment monitoring'. Patient accounts indicated a predominantly positive experience of lithium and quetiapine augmentation. Greater apprehension about side effects was reported for lithium prior to treatment initiation, but greater experience of negative side effects was reported for quetiapine. Clinical monitoring was perceived positively.
conclusionPatient accounts suggested treatment augmentation with lithium or quetiapine was acceptable and helpful for most patients. However, anticipation and experiences of adverse side effects may prevent some patients from benefitting from these treatments.
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.