Literature DB >> 12943942

Relationships among measures of treatment outcome in depressed patients.

Roger T Mulder1, Peter R Joyce, Chris Frampton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies attempting to identify predictors of antidepressant response in patients with major depression have reported inconsistent results. One explanation may be the different definitions of outcome used.
METHODS: 187 depressed subjects were recruited and were randomised to treatment with fluoxetine and nortriptyline. At baseline and 6 weeks, subjects completed Hamilton Depression Rating Scale HDRS-17 and 27, Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-90) and the Social Adjustment Scale (SAS) as well as the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI). Relationships among outcome measures were assessed. Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC curves) were used to show the diagnostic ability of the MADRS and HDRS in predicting the clinician's rating.
RESULTS: All outcome measures were moderately to highly correlated. All measures were significantly related to the clinician's global impression, but the strongest associations were with the MADRS score. Using ROC curves we showed that a score of 8 on the HDRS or 14 on the MADRS was the optimal compromise between sensitivity and specificity in dividing this sample into responders and non-responders. A 60% reduction in HDRS and MADRS scores rather than a 50% reduction appeared the most valid division between responders and non-responders. LIMITATIONS: We relied on clinician judgement as the validating criterion. The results only apply to a sample of moderately depressed outpatients.
CONCLUSIONS: The MADRS score seemed to most accurately reflect a clinician's impression of change. Dividing a sample into responders and non-responders can be approached empirically.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12943942     DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0327(02)00080-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Affect Disord        ISSN: 0165-0327            Impact factor:   4.839


  18 in total

1.  The fallacy of thresholds used in defining response and remission in depression rating scales.

Authors:  Florian Naudet; Bruno Millet; Jean Michel Reymann; Bruno Falissard
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.035

2.  The study protocol of the Norwegian randomized controlled trial of electroconvulsive therapy in treatment resistant depression in bipolar disorder.

Authors:  Ute Kessler; Arne E Vaaler; Helle Schøyen; Ketil J Oedegaard; Per Bergsholm; Ole A Andreassen; Ulrik F Malt; Gunnar Morken
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 3.630

Review 3.  The Depression Inventory Development Workgroup: A Collaborative, Empirically Driven Initiative to Develop a New Assessment Tool for Major Depressive Disorder.

Authors:  Anthony L Vaccarino; Kenneth R Evans; Amir H Kalali; Sidney H Kennedy; Nina Engelhardt; Benicio N Frey; John H Greist; Kenneth A Kobak; Raymond W Lam; Glenda MacQueen; Roumen Milev; Franca M Placenza; Arun V Ravindran; David V Sheehan; Terrence Sills; Janet B W Williams
Journal:  Innov Clin Neurosci       Date:  2016-10-01

4.  The Montgomery Asberg and the Hamilton ratings of depression: a comparison of measures.

Authors:  Thomas J Carmody; A John Rush; Ira Bernstein; Diane Warden; Stephen Brannan; Daniel Burnham; Ada Woo; Madhukar H Trivedi
Journal:  Eur Neuropsychopharmacol       Date:  2006-06-12       Impact factor: 4.600

5.  A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Combined Escitalopram and Memantine for Older Adults With Major Depression and Subjective Memory Complaints.

Authors:  Helen Lavretsky; Kelsey T Laird; Beatrix Krause-Sorio; Brandon F Heimberg; Jillian Yeargin; Adrienne Grzenda; Pauline Wu; Kitikan Thana-Udom; Linda M Ercoli; Prabha Siddarth
Journal:  Am J Geriatr Psychiatry       Date:  2019-08-22       Impact factor: 4.105

6.  A psychometric evaluation of the CDRS and MADRS in assessing depressive symptoms in children.

Authors:  Shailesh Jain; Thomas J Carmody; Madhukar H Trivedi; Carroll Hughes; Ira H Bernstein; David W Morris; Graham J Emslie; A John Rush
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 8.829

7.  A randomized, placebo-controlled trial of risperidone augmentation for patients with difficult-to-treat unipolar, non-psychotic major depression.

Authors:  Gabor I Keitner; Steven J Garlow; Christine E Ryan; Philip T Ninan; David A Solomon; Charles B Nemeroff; Martin B Keller
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2008-06-30       Impact factor: 4.791

Review 8.  The importance of functional impairment to mental health outcomes: a case for reassessing our goals in depression treatment research.

Authors:  Patrick E McKnight; Todd B Kashdan
Journal:  Clin Psychol Rev       Date:  2009-02-07

9.  Unilateral and bilateral MRI-targeted repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant depression: a randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Daniel M Blumberger; Jerome J Maller; Lauren Thomson; Benoit H Mulsant; Tarek K Rajji; Missy Maher; Patrick E Brown; Jonathan Downar; Fidel Vila-Rodriguez; Paul B Fitzgerald; Zafiris J Daskalakis
Journal:  J Psychiatry Neurosci       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 6.186

10.  The structure of the Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale over the course of treatment for depression.

Authors:  Lena C Quilty; Jennifer J Robinson; Jean-Pierre Rolland; Filip De Fruyt; Frédéric Rouillon; R Michael Bagby
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-08-19       Impact factor: 4.035

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.