MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516654568 · doi:10.1177/0706743716664885

Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Failed Antidepressant Treatment Response in Major Depressive Disorder, Dysthymia, and Subthreshold Depression in Adults

2016· review· en· W2516654568 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Glenda MacQueen, Pasqualina Santaguida, Homa Keshavarz, Natalia Jaworska, Mitchell Levine, Joseph Beyene, Parminder Raina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMajor depressive disorderPsychiatryAntidepressantDepression (economics)MedicinePsychologyClinical psychologyMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review critically evaluated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for treating adults with major depressive disorder, dysthymia, or subthreshold or minor depression for recommendations following inadequate response to first-line treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). METHOD: Searches for CPGs (January 2004 to November 2014) in English included 7 bibliographic databases and grey literature sources using CPG and depression as the keywords. Two raters selected CPGs on depression with a national scope. Data extraction included definitions of adequate response and recommended treatment options. Two raters assessed quality using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. RESULTS: From 46,908 citations, 3167 were screened at full text. From these 21 CPG were applicable to adults in primary care and outpatient settings. Five CPGs consider patients with dysthymia or subthreshold or minor depression. None provides recommendations for those who do not respond to first-line SSRI treatment. For adults with MDD, most CPGs do not define an "inadequate response" or provide specific suggestions regarding how to choose alternative medications when switching to an alternative antidepressant. There is variability between CPGs in recommending combination strategies. AGREE II ratings for stakeholder involvement in CPG development, editorial independence, and rigor of development are domains in which depression guidelines are often less robust. CONCLUSIONS: About half of patients with depression require second-line treatment to achieve remission. Consistency and clarity in guidelines for second-line treatment of depression are therefore important for clinicians but lacking in most current guidelines. This may reflect a paucity of primary studies upon which to base conclusions.

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)0.052
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.286
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0520.286
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.009
Bibliometrics0.0170.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 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

Citations123
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of PsychiatrySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207