Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 700

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Switching to Another SSRI or to Venlafaxine With or Without Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Adolescents With SSRI-Resistant Depression: The TORDIA Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Brent, David, Emslie, Graham, Clarke, Greg, Wagner, Karen Dineen, Asarnow, Joan Rosenbaum, Keller, Marty, Vitiello, Benedetto, Ritz, Louise, Iyengar, Satish, Abebe, Kaleab, Birmaher, Boris, Ryan, Neal, Kennard, Betsy, Hughes, Carroll, DeBar, Lynn, McCracken, James, Strober, Michael, Suddath, Robert, Spirito, Anthony, Leonard, Henrietta, Melhem, Nadine, Porta, Giovanna, Onorato, Matthew, Zelazny, Jamie·2008·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.299.8.901
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

CONTEXT: Only about 60% of adolescents with depression will show an adequate clinical response to an initial treatment trial with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI). There are no data to guide clinicians on subsequent treatment strategy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of 4 treatment strategies in adolescents who continued to have depression despite adequate initial treatment with an SSRI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial of a clinical sample of 334 patients aged 12 to 18 years with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder that had not responded to a 2-month initial treatment with an SSRI, conducted at 6 US academic and community clinics from 2000-2006. INTERVENTIONS: Twelve weeks of: (1) switch to a second, different SSRI (paroxetine, citalopram, or fluoxetine, 20-40 mg); (2) switch to a different SSRI plus cognitive behavioral therapy; (3) switch to venlafaxine (150-225 mg); or (4) switch to venlafaxine plus cognitive behavioral therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score of 2 or less (much or very much improved) and a decrease of at least 50% in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R); and change in CDRS-R over time. RESULTS: Cognitive behavioral therapy plus a switch to either medication regimen showed a higher response rate (54.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 47%-62%) than a medication switch alone (40.5%; 95% CI, 33%-48%; P = .009), but there was no difference in response rate between venlafaxine and a second SSRI (48.2%; 95% CI, 41%-56% vs 47.0%; 95% CI, 40%-55%; P = .83). There were no differential treatment effects on change in the CDRS-R, self-rated depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, or on the rate of harm-related or any other adverse events. There was a greater increase in diastolic blood pressure and pulse and more frequent occurrence of skin problems during venlafaxine than SSRI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: For adolescents with depression not responding to an adequate initial treatment with an SSRI, the combination of cognitive behavioral therapy and a switch to another antidepressant resulted in a higher rate of clinical response than did a medication switch alone. However, a switch to another SSRI was just as efficacious as a switch to venlafaxine and resulted in fewer adverse effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00018902.

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/jama.299.8.901

Cites

27 of 27 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

Cited by

See all 700

Metadata

Authors
Brent, D., Emslie, G., Clarke, G., Wagner, K. D., Asarnow, J. R., Keller, M., Vitiello, B., Ritz, L., Iyengar, S., Abebe, K., Birmaher, B., Ryan, N., Kennard, B., Hughes, C., DeBar, L., McCracken, J., Strober, M., Suddath, R., Spirito, A., Leonard, H., Melhem, N., Porta, G., Onorato, M., & Zelazny, J.
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2008-02-27
Volume
299
Issue
8
Pages
901
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.299.8.901
OpenAlex
W2113281483
Cited by
700
References
27
FWCI
34.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

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.