Literature DB >> 9614471

Meta-analysis of trials comparing antidepressants with active placebos.

J Moncrieff1, S Wessely, R Hardy.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Unblinding effects may introduce bias into clinical trials. The use of active placebos to mimic side-effects of medication may therefore produce more rigorous evidence on the efficacy of antidepressants.
METHOD: Trials comparing antidepressants with active placebos were located. A standard measure of effect was calculated for each trial and weighted pooled estimates obtained. Heterogeneity was examined and sensitivity analyses performed. A subgroup analysis of in-patient and out-patient trials was conducted.
RESULTS: Only two of the nine studies examined produced effect sizes which showed a consistent significant difference in favour of the active drug. Combining all studies produced pooled effect size estimates of between 0.41 (0.27-0.56) and 0.46 (0.31-0.60) with high heterogeneity due to one strongly positive trial. Sensitivity analyses excluding this and one other trial reduced the pooled effect to between 0.21 (0.03-0.38) and 0.27 (0.10-0.45).
CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis is very sensitive to decisions about exclusions. Previous general meta-analyses have found combined effect sizes in the range 0.4-0.8. The more conservative estimates produced here suggest that unblinding effects may inflate the efficacy of antidepressants in trials using inert placebos.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9614471     DOI: 10.1192/bjp.172.3.227

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Psychiatry        ISSN: 0007-1250            Impact factor:   9.319


  12 in total

1.  Naturalistic treatment study of depression in general practice. Clinical management is important in treatment of depression.

Authors:  P L Cornwall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-10-02

2.  A comparison of antidepressant trials using active and inert placebos.

Authors:  Joanna Moncrieff
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.035

Review 3.  The small specific effects of antidepressants in clinical trials: what do they mean to psychiatrists?

Authors:  Michael E Thase
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rep       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 5.285

4.  Every effect size has its place: a commentary on the avoidance of pre-post effect sizes.

Authors:  M Kösters
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 6.892

5.  Blindness and bias in a trial of antidepressant medication for chronic tension-type headache.

Authors:  K A Holroyd; G Tkachuk; F O'Donnell; G E Cordingley
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 6.292

6.  Traditional Chinese Exercises on Pain and Disability in Middle-Aged and Elderly Patients With Neck Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  Lingjun Kong; Jun Ren; Sitong Fang; Tianxiang He; Xin Zhou; Min Fang
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 5.702

7.  Was Eysenck right after all? A reassessment of the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression.

Authors:  P Cuijpers; E Karyotaki; M Reijnders; D D Ebert
Journal:  Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 6.892

8.  Pharmacotherapy of mood disorders and treatment discontinuation.

Authors:  Malcolm Lader
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

9.  Adjunctive atypical antipsychotic treatment for major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of depression, quality of life, and safety outcomes.

Authors:  Glen I Spielmans; Margit I Berman; Eftihia Linardatos; Nicholas Z Rosenlicht; Angela Perry; Alexander C Tsai
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  A Methodological Framework for Evaluating the Evidence for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) for Cancer.

Authors:  Robert Zachariae; Helle Johannessen
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2011-02-23       Impact factor: 6.639

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.