Cited by 152Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychological Treatments and Disorders

A double-blind comparison of venlafaxine and fluoxetine for treatment of major depression in outpatients

Dieric, Michel, Ravizza, Ujigi, Realini, Renzo, Martin, Alain·1996·Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

1. This was a randomized, double-blind comparison of the efficacy and safety of venlafaxine and fluoxetine in outpatients with major depression. 2. Three hundred fourteen patients were randomly assigned to either venlafaxine 37.5 mg twice daily or fluoxetine 20 mg once daily for a maximum of 8 weeks. 3. If the response was inadequate after two weeks of treatment, the dosage of venlafaxine could be increased to 75 mg twice daily. 4. A clinical response, defined as at least a 50% decrease from baseline in the total HAM-D score, was attained at week 6 in 72% of patients on venlafaxine and 60% of patients on fluoxetine (p = 0.023). 5. Among patients who increased their dose at 2 weeks, venlafaxine was significantly (p < 0.05) superior from week 3 onward on the HAM-D. 6. Venlafaxine 75 mg daily is comparable to fluoxetine, but at 150 mg daily, it may be superior to fluoxetine in outpatients with major depression who do not respond early to treatment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0278-5846(95)00292-8

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dieric, M., Ravizza, U., Realini, R., & Martin, A.
Affiliations
University of Turin (IT)
Corresponding author
Dieric, Michel
Venue
Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-01
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
57-71
ISSN
0278-5846 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1988861786
Cited by
152
References
23
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 1
FWCI
13.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Disorders
Keywords
venlafaxine, fluoxetine, major depressive disorder, outpatients, antidepressant efficacy, drug safety, dose escalation, treatment response, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale
MeSH terms
Venlafaxine Hydrochloride, Adult, Aged, Cyclohexanols, Depressive Disorder, Double-Blind Method, Female, Fluoxetine, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation

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