4.5 Article

Relationship between probability of receiving placebo and probability of prematurely discontinuing treatment in double-blind, randomized clinical trials for MDD: A meta-analysis

期刊

EUROPEAN NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY
卷 20, 期 8, 页码 562-567

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2010.02.004

关键词

Antidepressant; Placebo; Discontinuation; Major; Depressive; Disorder; Adults

资金

  1. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
  2. Forest Pharmaceuticals
  3. National Institute of Mental
  4. Abbott Laboratories
  5. Alkermes
  6. Aspect Medical Systems
  7. Astra-Zeneca
  8. Bio Research
  9. Brain Cells, Inc.
  10. Cephalon
  11. Clinical Trial Solutions
  12. Eli Lilly Et Company
  13. Forest Pharmaceuticals Inc.
  14. Ganeden
  15. GlaxoSmithKline
  16. J & J Pharmaceuticals
  17. Lichtwer Pharma GmbH
  18. Lorex Pharmaceuticals
  19. NARSAD
  20. NCCAM
  21. NIDA
  22. NIMH
  23. Novartis
  24. Organon Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An increased likelihood of receiving placebo in randomized clinical trials has been found to predict greater chances of trial success. However, patients who are less likely to receive active therapy (and more likely to receive placebo) may be at increased risk of attrition which, in turn, can limit the statistical power of a study. Therefore, in the present work, we sought to investigate the relationship between the probability of receiving placebo and the likelihood of prematurely discontinuing treatment. Medline/Pubmed publication databases were searched for RCT in MDD. A meta-regression established that the likelihood of receiving placebo did not predict either antidepressant discontinuation rates, placebo-discontinuation rates or the risk ratio of discontinuing antidepressants versus placebo. An increased likelihood of receiving placebo did not inflate discontinuation rates which did not influence the degree of antidepressant-placebo separation. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. and ECNP. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据