Cited by 264Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Treatment outcomes for depression: challenges and opportunities

Open access
Cuijpers, Pim, Stringaris, Argyris, Wolpert, Miranda·2020·The Lancet Psychiatry

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 · 10.1016/s2215-0366(20)30036-5

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • Previous research on recovery from depression has predominantly focused on intervention mechanisms such as medications and behavioral therapies, often overlooking the subjective experience of recovery and how individuals perceive, select, and accept treatments.

    “Previous research on recovery from depression has predominantly focused on intervention mechanisms such as medications and behavioral therapies (69–75), often overlooking the subjective experience of recovery and how individuals perceive, select, and accept treatments during the process.”

    From Anti-stigmatizing: a collaborative autoethnography on recovery from depression (2024) · cites this paper as [72]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Still other critiques question the extent to which conceptualising depression as a biological disorder with implications for use of medications is simply a ploy for reification of normal human suffering under a medical model and promotion of the pharmaceutical industry.

    “Still other critiques question the extent to which conceptualising depression as a biological disorder with implications for use of medications is simply a ploy for reification of normal human suffering under a medical model and promotion of the pharmaceutical industry. 15”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cuijpers, P., Stringaris, A., & Wolpert, M.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam Public Health (NL)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Wolpert, Miranda
Venue
The Lancet Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-11
Volume
7
Issue
11
Pages
925-927
ISSN
2215-0366 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3006408375
Cited by
262
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 47 · 2020: 7
FWCI
17.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
depression, treatment outcomes, antidepressants, psychotherapy, first-line therapy, treatment effectiveness, quality of life
MeSH terms
Depressive Disorder, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Biomedical Research

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