MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1504483181 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001026

Antidepressants plus benzodiazepines for major depression

2001· review· en· W1504483181 on OpenAlexaff
Toshi A. Furukawa, David L. Streiner, L. Trevor Young, Yoshihiro Kinoshita

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)AnxietyAntidepressantMedicineCochrane LibraryRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEPsychiatryMeta-analysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Anxiety frequently coexists with depression. There is no systematic review to show if adding benzodiazepines to antidepressants can bring about any advantage over antidepressants alone in the treatment of depression, although such a combination prescription appears to be widely practiced worldwide OBJECTIVES: To determine whether, among adult patients with major depression, adding benzodiazepines to antidepressants brings about any benefit in terms of symptomatic recovery or side-effects in the short term (less than 8 weeks) and long term (more than 2 months), in comparison with treatment by antidepressants alone. SEARCH STRATEGY: Electronic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Biological Abstracts, LILACS, PsycLit, the Cochrane Library and the trial register of the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (January 1972 to December 1998), combined with hand searching, reference searching, SciSearch and personal contacts. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomized controlled trials that compared combined antidepressant-benzodiazepine treatment with antidepressant alone for adult patients with major depression (Feighner criteria, RDC, DSM-III, DSM-III-R, DSM-IV or ICD-10). Exclusion criteria are: antidepressant dosage lower than 100 mg of imipramine or its equivalent daily and duration of trial shorter than 4 weeks. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and quality of the studies. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. Standardized weighted mean differences and relative risks were estimated with random effects model. The dropouts were assigned the least favorable outcome. Two sensitivity analyses examined the effect of this assumption as well as the effect of including medium quality studies. Three a priori subgroup analyses were performed with regard to the patients with or without comorbid anxiety and with regard to the types of benzodiazepines tested. MAIN RESULTS: Aggregating nine studies with a total of 679 patients, the combination therapy group was 37% (95%CI: 19 to 51%) less likely to drop out than the antidepressant alone group. The intention-to-treat analysis showed that the former were 63% (18 to 127%) to 38% (15 to 66%) more likely to show response (defined as 50% or greater reduction in the depression scale from baseline) up to 4 weeks. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The potential benefits of adding a benzodiazepine to an antidepressant must be balanced judiciously against possible harms including development of dependence and accident proneness, on the one hand, and against continued suffering following no response and drop-out, on the other.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations155
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207