SynthesisBMC psychiatry2025
Adherence to evidence-based treatment guidelines for depression: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is ageism among prescribers an influential factor in the management of depression in the elderly? A vignette-based study.Family practice · 2026Article
- The relevance of phenotypic definition in treatment resistant forms of major depressive disorder: a narrative review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Knowledge Gaps and Systemic Challenges in Antidepressant Prescribing: Insights from Jordanian Psychiatry Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDepression is a common mental disorder that has a profound impact on daily life and increases the risk of chronic diseases and mortality. Adherence to treatment guidelines would produce better patient outcomes but is often suboptimal. The objective of this systematic review was to examine adherence to evidence-based treatment guidelines for depression, identify factors that influence adherence and understand how to improve it.
methodsWe searched the PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane databases. We included original trials, studies dealing with treatment-related guidelines and patients suffering from depressive disorders. We excluded reviews, study protocols and studies that dealt exclusively with mental disorders other than depression.
results85 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies focused on young subjects, three on the perinatal population and three on the elderly. A few studies concerned a population with somatic (n = 11) or psychiatric (n = 25) comorbidities. Eight articles focused on ethnic minorities. DISCUSSION: The lack of standard measurement on adherence and the variability in adherence rates highlight the complexity of assessing and implementing guideline-concordant care, and the associated challenges. Factors that influence adherence, such as those related to patients and their comorbidities, physicians, and guideline-related factors, play a significant role in determining whether appropriate treatment is received. Despite the complexity and cost of these strategies, multifaceted approach to guideline implementation, including the active involvement of clinicians, ongoing monitoring, and organisational support, improves guideline adherence.
conclusionThis review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of guideline adherence in treatment of depression and identifies areas for quality improvement initiatives.
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.