Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 601

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 61 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Sertraline vs Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study: Results From a Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Open access
Brunoni, Andre R., Valiengo, Leandro, Baccaro, Alessandra, Zanão, Tamires A., de Oliveira, Janaina F., Goulart, Alessandra, Boggio, Paulo S., Lotufo, Paulo A., Benseñor, Isabela M., Fregni, Felipe·2013·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) trials for major depressive disorder (MDD) have shown positive but mixed results. OBJECTIVE: To assess the combined safety and efficacy of tDCS vs a common pharmacological treatment (sertraline hydrochloride, 50 mg/d). DESIGN: Double-blind, controlled trial. Participants were randomized using a 2 × 2 factorial design to sertraline/placebo and active/sham tDCS. SETTING: Outpatient, single-center academic setting in São Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred twenty antidepressant-free patients with moderate to severe, nonpsychotic, unipolar MDD. INTERVENTIONS: Six-week treatment of 2-mA anodal left/cathodal right prefrontal tDCS (twelve 30-minute sessions: 10 consecutive sessions once daily from Monday to Friday plus 2 extra sessions every other week) and sertraline hydrochloride (50 mg/d). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES In this intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome measure was the change in Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale score at 6 weeks (end point). We considered a difference of at least 3 points to be clinically relevant. The analysis plan was previously published. Safety was measured with an adverse effects questionnaire, the young mania rating scale, and cognitive assessment. Secondary measures were rates of clinical response and remission and scores on other scales. RESULTS: At the main end point, there was a significant difference in Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale scores when comparing the combined treatment group (sertraline/active tDCS) vs sertraline only (mean difference, 8.5 points; 95% CI, 2.96 to 14.03; P = .002), tDCS only (mean difference, 5.9 points; 95% CI, 0.36 to 11.43; P = .03), and placebo/sham tDCS (mean difference, 11.5 points; 95% CI, 6.03 to 17.10; P < .001). Analysis of tDCS only vs sertraline only presented comparable efficacies (mean difference, 2.6 points; 95% CI, -2.90 to 8.13; P = .35). Use of tDCS only (but not sertraline only) was superior to placebo/sham tDCS. Common adverse effects did not differ between interventions, except for skin redness on the scalp in active tDCS (P = .03). There were 7 episodes of treatment-emergent mania or hypomania, 5 occurring in the combined treatment group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In MDD, the combination of tDCS and sertraline increases the efficacy of each treatment. The efficacy and safety of tDCS and sertraline did not differ. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01033084.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/2013.jamapsychiatry.32

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 61 references

Cited by

See all 601

Metadata

Authors
Brunoni, A. R., Valiengo, L., Baccaro, A., Zanão, T. A., de Oliveira, J. F., Goulart, A., Boggio, P. S., Lotufo, P. A., Benseñor, I. M., & Fregni, F.
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2013-04-01
Volume
70
Issue
4
Pages
383
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2169624269
Cited by
601
References
61
FWCI
30.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Sertraline vs Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study: Results From a Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/2013.jamapsychiatry.32
The paper
Brunoni, A. R., Valiengo, L., Baccaro, A., Zanão, T. A., de Oliveira, J. F., Goulart, A., Boggio, P. S., Lotufo, P. A., Benseñor, I. M., & Fregni, F. (2013). The Sertraline vs Electrical Current Therapy for Treating Depression Clinical Study: Results From a Factorial, Randomized, Controlled Trial. JAMA Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1001/2013.jamapsychiatry.32

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.