ArticleBMC psychiatry2023
Prospective study of antidepressant treatment of psychiatric patients with depressive disorders: treatment adequacy and outcomes.
Article in BMC psychiatry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement-Based Care to Enhance Antidepressant Treatment Outcomes in Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Evaluating the rational use of antidepressant in older patients: a comprehensive analysis of its association with cognitive impairment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite numerous national depression care guidelines (DCGs), suboptimal antidepressant treatment may occur. We examined DCG concordance and depression treatment outcomes in psychiatric settings.
methodsWe evaluated treatment received and outcomes of 128 psychiatric out- and inpatients participating in the PEGAD (Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacogenetics of Antidepressant Treatment for Depressive Disorders) study at baseline, two weeks, and eight weeks using interviews and questionnaires. Inclusion criteria were ICD-10 diagnosis of a depressive disorder, a Patient Health Questionnaire-9 symptom (PHQ-9) score ≥ 10, and a new antidepressant prescribed. The primary outcome of the study was within-individual change in PHQ-9 scores.
resultsAt baseline, patients had predominately recurrent (83%) and in 19% treatment-resistant depression (TRD). The median preceding duration of the current episode was 6.5 months. At eight weeks, 85% of the patients (n = 107) used a DCG-concordant antidepressant dose. However, due to the scarcity of antidepressant combinations and augmentations, fewer TRD than non-TRD patients (25% vs. 84%, p < 0.005) received adequate antidepressant treatment. Additionally, one-third of the patients received inadequate follow-up. Overall, only 53% received treatment compatible with DCG recommendations for adequate pharmacotherapy and follow-up. The mean decline in PHQ-9 scores (-3.8 ± SD 5.7) was significant (p < 0.0005). Nearly 40% of the patients reached a subthreshold level of depression (PHQ-9 < 10), predicted by a lower baseline PHQ-9 score, recurrent depression, and female sex. However, 45% experienced no significant clinical improvement (PHQ-9 score reduction < 20%).
conclusionsOur findings suggest that inadequate treatment continues to occur in psychiatric care settings, particularly for TRD patients.
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.