Cited by 447Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Defining treatment‐resistant depression

Open access
Gaynes, Bradley N., Lux, Linda, Gartlehner, Gerald, Asher, Gary, Forman‐Hoffman, Valerie, Green, Josh, Boland, Erin, Weber, Rachel P. +5 more·2020·Depression and Anxiety

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Varying conceptualizations of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) have made translating research findings or systematic reviews into clinical practice guidelines challenging and inconsistent. METHODS: We conducted a review for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality to clarify how experts and investigators have defined TRD and to review systematically how well this definition comports with TRD definitions in clinical trials through July 5, 2019. RESULTS: We found that no consensus definition existed for TRD. The most common TRD definition for major depressive disorder required a minimum of two prior treatment failures and confirmation of prior adequate dose and duration. The most common TRD definition for bipolar disorder required one prior treatment failure. No clear consensus emerged on defining adequacy of either dose or duration. Our systematic review found that only 17% of intervention studies enrolled samples meeting the most frequently specified criteria for TRD. Depressive outcomes and clinical global impressions were commonly measured; functional impairment and quality-of-life tools were rarely used. CONCLUSIONS: Two key steps are critical to advancing TRD research: (a) Developing a consensus definition of TRD that addresses how best to specify the number of prior treatment failures and the adequacy of dose and duration; and (b) identifying a core package of outcome measures that can be applied in a standardized manner. Our recommendations about stronger approaches to designing and conducting TRD research will foster better evidence to translate into clearer guidelines for treating patients with this serious condition.

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 · 10.1002/da.22968

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Another review found that only 20% of studies used the most common definition of TRD of at least 2 failed treatments and confirmation of prior adequate dose and duration.

    “Another review found that only 20% of studies used the most common definition of TRD of at least 2 failed treatments and confirmation of prior adequate dose and duration (Gaynes et al., 2020).”

    From Irremediability in psychiatric euthanasia: examining the objective standard (2023) · cites this paper as Gaynes et al., 2020

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2018). Depression. The treatment and management of depression in adults (updated edition). Leicester, UK: British Psychological Society.
  2. NeuroStar Advanced Therapy (2017). About NeuroStar® TMS Therapy. Malvern, PA: NeuroStar Advanced Therapy. New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council (2012). Treatment options for treatment-resistant, Depression: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation. Boston, MA: Institute for Clinical and Economic Review.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gaynes, B. N., Lux, L., Gartlehner, G., Asher, G., Forman‐Hoffman, V., Green, J., Boland, E., Weber, R. P., Randolph, C., Bann, C., Coker‐Schwimmer, E., Viswanathan, M., & Lohr, K. N.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • RTI International (US)
  • Universität für Weiterbildung Krems (AT)
Corresponding author
Gaynes, Bradley N.
Venue
Depression and Anxiety
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-10-22
Volume
37
Issue
2
Pages
134-145
ISSN
  • 1091-4269 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6394
OpenAlex
W2981767691
Cited by
447
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 66 · 2025: 75 · 2024: 93 · 2023: 85 · 2022: 77 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 19 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Depression and Anxiety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HHSA290201500011I‐TO6)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
treatment-resistant depression, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, prior treatment failure, outcome measures, functional disability, quality of life, clinical trials
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Bipolar Disorder, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Quality of Life, United States, Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant

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