MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design and Rationale for a Randomized, Controlled Trial of Interpersonal Psychotherapy and Citalopram for Depression in Coronary Artery Disease (CREATE)

2006· article· en· W2026910415 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Frasure‐Smith, Diana Koszycki, John Swenson, Brian Baker, Louis T. van Zyl, Marc-André Laliberté, Beth L. Abramson, Jean Lambert, Ginette Gravel, François Lespérance

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychosomatic Medicine · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitalopramInterpersonal psychotherapyPlaceboTolerabilityCoronary artery diseaseMedicinePillBeck Depression InventoryRandomized controlled trialDepression (economics)FluoxetineClinical trialInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychologyPhysical therapyAdverse effectAntidepressantPharmacologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Recognition that depression is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients has augmented the need for evidence-based treatment guidelines. This article presents the design of a multisite, Canadian trial of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), an empirically supported, depression-focused therapy, and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor citalopram, alone or in combination, in the treatment of major depression in CAD patients. Methods: Two hundred eighty stable CAD patients with a current major depressive episode of at least 4 weeks’ duration, based on the Structured Clinical Interview for Depression (SCID), and who have a baseline score >19 on a centralized, telephone-administered, 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) will be randomly assigned to receive 12 weekly IPT sessions or 12 weekly sessions of standardized clinical management (CM). Patients are also randomly assigned to receive 20 to 40 mg per day of citalopram or pill-placebo. This results in a 2-by-2 factorial design with four groups: IPT plus pill-placebo, IPT plus citalopram, CM plus pill-placebo, and CM plus citalopram. This permits the evaluation of both IPT and citalopram. Blinded, centralized, 24-item, HAM-D telephone ratings constitute the primary outcome variable. The self-report Beck Depression Inventory-II is the secondary outcome. Analyses will involve the intent-to-treat principle with last observation carried forward for incomplete assessments. Results: Not applicable. Conclusions: The results of this trial will contribute to the development of evidence-based clinical guidelines for managing depression in the context of CAD. CREATE = Canadian Cardiac Randomized Evaluation of Antidepressant and Psychotherapy Efficacy; IPT = interpersonal psychotherapy; CAD = coronary artery disease; SCID = Structured Clinical Interview for Depression; HAM-D = Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; CM = clinical management; SADHART = Sertraline Antidepressant Heart Attack Randomized Trial; ENRICHD = Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease; SSRI = selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; ECG = electrocardiogram; NIMH = National Institute of Mental Health; TDCRP = Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program; MMSE = Mini-mental Status Exam; STAR*D = Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression; IDS = Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology; BDI-II = Beck Depression Inventory-II; IPRI = Interpersonal Relationship Inventory; FPI = Functional Performance Inventory; SAE = serious adverse event; LOCF = last observation carried forward; DSMB = data safety monitoring board.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.321 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations33
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychosomatic MedicineSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207