Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39871264›Full record

ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025

Insights into prescribing patterns for antidepressants: an evidence-based analysis.

Hua Min, Farrokh Alemi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hua MinDepartment of Health Administration and Policy, College of Public Health, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA. hmin3@gmu.edu.
Farrokh AlemiDepartment of Health Administration and Policy, College of Public Health, George Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntidepressants are a primary treatment for depression, yet prescribing them poses significant challenges due to the absence of clear guidelines for selecting the most suitable option for individual patients. This study aimed to analyze prescribing patterns for antidepressants across healthcare providers, including physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists, to better understand the complex factors influencing these patterns in the management of depression.

methodsLeast Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was employed to identify variables that explained the variation in the prescribed antidepressants, utilizing a large number of claims. Models were created to identify the prescription patterns of the 14 most common antidepressants, including amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, nortriptyline, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, and venlafaxine. The accuracy of predictions was measured through the Area under the Receiver Operating Curve (AROC).

resultsOur analysis revealed several key factors influencing prescribing patterns, including patients' comorbidities, previous medications, age, and gender. A history of high antidepressant use (four or more prior medications) was the most common factor across antidepressants. Age influenced prescribing patterns, with mirtazapine and trazodone more frequent among older patients, while fluoxetine and sertraline were more common in younger individuals. Condition-specific factors included trazodone for insomnia, and amitriptyline or nortriptyline for headaches. Paroxetine, venlafaxine, and sertraline more often prescribed to females, while bupropion and doxepin were commonly prescribed for patients with tobacco use disorder and opioid dependence. Predictive factors per medicine ranged from 51 (doxepin) to 168 (citalopram), with cross-validated AROC scores averaging 76.3%.

conclusionsOur findings provide valuable insights into the nuanced factors that shape evidence-based antidepressant prescribing practices, offering a foundation for more personalized, effective depression treatment. Further research is needed to validate these models in other extant databases. These findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of antidepressant prescribing practices and have the potential to improve patient outcomes in the management of depression.

Indexed as

Antidepressive AgentsDepressionPractice Patterns, Physicians'AdultAgedEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAntidepressive AgentsAntidepressantsClaimsEvidence-based analysisMachine learningPrescribing behaviors

Identifiers

PMID39871264
PMCPMC11773954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.