Literature DB >> 23562150

A comparative analysis between site-based and centralized ratings and patient self-ratings in a clinical trial of Major Depressive Disorder.

Steven D Targum1, Pamela C Wedel, Jill Robinson, David G Daniel, Joan Busner, Leo S Bleicher, Philip Rauh, Carrolee Barlow.   

Abstract

We compared scores from three different ratings methods in a clinical trial of patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (QIDS-SR16) was compared to site-based clinician and centralized (site-independent) ratings of the Inventory of Depressive Symptoms (IDSc30). An extracted QIDSc16 was used for a matched comparison with the QIDS-SR16. Patient self-ratings were more depressed at baseline than either site-based ratings (p = 0.131) or centralized ratings (p = 0.005), but significantly less depressed at the end of double-blind treatment than either site-based (p = 0.006) or centralized ratings (p = 0.014), and after 12 weeks (site-based ratings: p = 0.048; centralized ratings: p = 0.004). The matched comparisons with patient self-ratings revealed ICC of r = 0.55 (site-based raters) and r = 0.49 (centralized raters) at baseline. After baseline, the correlations between the two different clinician ratings and patient self-ratings improved to r-values between 0.78 and 0.89. At the end of double-blind treatment, site-based raters separated the combination treatment from placebo on the IDSc30 (p = 0.030) whereas neither centralized ratings nor patient self-ratings achieved statistical significance. Alternatively, patient self-ratings separated the combination treatment from buspirone (p = 0.030) whereas neither clinician rating method achieved significance. A "dual" scoring concordance range reduced the placebo response rate and increased the drug effect between the combination treatment and placebo. These findings reveal scoring variability between each of the three ratings methods and challenge the reliability of any single method to accurately assess symptom severity scores, particularly at baseline. The use of "dual" scoring criteria may help to confirm symptom severity scores and improve ratings precision, particularly prior to enrolling subjects into CNS trials.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23562150     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.02.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychiatr Res        ISSN: 0022-3956            Impact factor:   4.791


  7 in total

1.  Baseline difference between patients' and clinicians' rated illness severity scores and subsequent outcomes in major depressive disorder: analysis of the sequenced treatment alternatives to relieve depression data.

Authors:  Mitsuhiro Tada; Hiroyuki Uchida; Takefumi Suzuki; Takayuki Abe; Bruce G Pollock; Masaru Mimura
Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.153

2.  Desvenlafaxine Versus Placebo in the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder.

Authors:  Sarah Atkinson; Shannon Lubaczewski; Sara Ramaker; Richard D England; Dalia B Wajsbrot; Richat Abbas; Robert L Findling
Journal:  J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.576

3.  Translating the BDI and BDI-II into the HAMD and vice versa with equipercentile linking.

Authors:  Toshi A Furukawa; Mirjam Reijnders; Sanae Kishimoto; Masatsugu Sakata; Robert J DeRubeis; Sona Dimidjian; David J A Dozois; Ulrich Hegerl; Steven D Hollon; Robin B Jarrett; François Lespérance; Zindel V Segal; David C Mohr; Anne D Simons; Lena C Quilty; Charles F Reynolds; Claudio Gentili; Stefan Leucht; Rolf R Engel; Pim Cuijpers
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 6.892

4.  Magnitude of change with antidepressants and placebo in antidepressant clinical trials using structured, taped and appraised rater interviews (SIGMA-RAPS) compared to trials using traditional semi-structured interviews.

Authors:  Arif Khan; James Faucett; Walter A Brown
Journal:  Psychopharmacology (Berl)       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 4.530

5.  Audio-digital recordings for surveillance in clinical trials of major depressive disorder.

Authors:  Steven D Targum; Christopher J Catania
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2019-01-08

Review 6.  Trends in (not) using scales in major depression: A categorization and clinical orientation.

Authors:  Koen Demyttenaere; Liesbeth Jaspers
Journal:  Eur Psychiatry       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 5.361

7.  Placebo response mitigation with a participant-focused psychoeducational procedure: a randomized, single-blind, all placebo study in major depressive and psychotic disorders.

Authors:  Elan A Cohen; Howard H Hassman; Larry Ereshefsky; David P Walling; Vera M Grindell; Richard S E Keefe; Katarzyna Wyka; William P Horan
Journal:  Neuropsychopharmacology       Date:  2020-11-26       Impact factor: 7.853

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.