The efficacy of antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy for adult acute-phase depression: study protocol of a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual participant data.
Depression
antidepressant medication
efficacy
individual participant data meta-analysis
interpersonal psychotherapy
Journal
BJPsych open
ISSN: 2056-4724
Titre abrégé: BJPsych Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101667931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
19 Feb 2021
19 Feb 2021
Historique:
entrez:
19
2
2021
pubmed:
20
2
2021
medline:
20
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are both recommended interventions in depression treatment guidelines based on literature reviews and meta-analyses. However, 'conventional' meta-analyses comparing their efficacy are limited by their reliance on reported study-level information and a narrow focus on depression outcome measures assessed at treatment completion. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, considered the gold standard in evidence synthesis, can improve the quality of the analyses when compared with conventional meta-analysis. We describe the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and IPT for adult acute-phase depression across a range of outcome measures, including depressive symptom severity as well as functioning and well-being, at both post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891). We will conduct a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomised clinical trials comparing antidepressants and IPT in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. We will invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects at post-treatment and follow-up for all outcome measures that are assessed in at least two studies. This will be the first IPD meta-analysis examining antidepressants versus IPT efficacy. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by comparing the short- and long-term effects of two widely used interventions across a range of outcome measures using state-of-the-art statistical techniques.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Antidepressant medication and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) are both recommended interventions in depression treatment guidelines based on literature reviews and meta-analyses. However, 'conventional' meta-analyses comparing their efficacy are limited by their reliance on reported study-level information and a narrow focus on depression outcome measures assessed at treatment completion. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis, considered the gold standard in evidence synthesis, can improve the quality of the analyses when compared with conventional meta-analysis.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
We describe the protocol for a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of antidepressants and IPT for adult acute-phase depression across a range of outcome measures, including depressive symptom severity as well as functioning and well-being, at both post-treatment and follow-up (PROSPERO: CRD42020219891).
METHOD
METHODS
We will conduct a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify randomised clinical trials comparing antidepressants and IPT in the acute-phase treatment of adults with depression. We will invite the authors of these studies to share the participant-level data of their trials. One-stage IPD meta-analyses will be conducted using mixed-effects models to assess treatment effects at post-treatment and follow-up for all outcome measures that are assessed in at least two studies.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This will be the first IPD meta-analysis examining antidepressants versus IPT efficacy. This study has the potential to enhance our knowledge of depression treatment by comparing the short- and long-term effects of two widely used interventions across a range of outcome measures using state-of-the-art statistical techniques.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33602371
doi: 10.1192/bjo.2021.4
pii: S2056472421000041
pmc: PMC8058821
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e56Subventions
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P01 AG012435
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIA NIH HHS
ID : P30 AG066530
Pays : United States
Références
N Engl J Med. 2008 Jan 17;358(3):252-60
pubmed: 18199864
Psychol Med. 2010 Feb;40(2):211-23
pubmed: 19490745
BMJ. 2015 Jan 02;350:g7647
pubmed: 25555855
Clin Psychol Rev. 2010 Feb;30(1):51-62
pubmed: 19781837
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2018 Mar 28;10:80-85
pubmed: 29696162
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 20;8(2):e018900
pubmed: 29463590
Clin Psychol Rev. 2020 Aug;80:101886
pubmed: 32650213
J R Stat Soc Ser A Stat Soc. 2009 Jan;172(1):137-159
pubmed: 19381330
Stat Med. 2017 Feb 28;36(5):855-875
pubmed: 27747915
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2005 Apr;255(2):75-82
pubmed: 15812600
Am J Psychiatry. 2011 Jun;168(6):581-92
pubmed: 21362740
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961 Jun;4:561-71
pubmed: 13688369
JAMA Psychiatry. 2015 Nov;72(11):1102-9
pubmed: 26397232
BMJ. 2012 Jan 03;344:d7762
pubmed: 22214758
BMC Psychiatry. 2013 Jan 11;13:22
pubmed: 23312024
World Psychiatry. 2020 Feb;19(1):92-107
pubmed: 31922679
Stat Med. 2001 Aug 15;20(15):2219-41
pubmed: 11468761
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1998 Feb;66(1):7-18
pubmed: 9489259
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1960 Feb;23:56-62
pubmed: 14399272
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Jan;67(1):73-86
pubmed: 24262771
Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2019 Mar 14;29:e24
pubmed: 30867082
BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 13;7(2):e013478
pubmed: 28193851
BMJ. 2010 Feb 05;340:c221
pubmed: 20139215
Lancet. 1993 Feb 13;341(8842):418-22
pubmed: 8094183
Am J Psychother. 2014;68(4):359-83
pubmed: 26453343
Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Jul 1;173(7):680-7
pubmed: 27032627
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010 Dec;67(12):1265-73
pubmed: 21135326
Psychother Psychosom. 2018;87(3):140-153
pubmed: 29847831
BMJ. 2011 Jul 22;343:d4002
pubmed: 21784880