Cited by 22Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

The antidepressant standoff: Why it continues and how to resolve it

Open access
Ormel, Johan, Spinhoven, Philip, de Vries, Ymkje Anna, Cramer, Angélique O. J., Siegle, Greg J., Bockting, Claudi L. H., Hollon, Steven D.·2020·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background: Antidepressant medications (ADMs) are widely used and long-term use is increasing. Given this extensive use and recommendation of ADMs in guidelines, one would expect ADMs to be universally considered effective. Surprisingly, that is not the case; fierce debate on their benefits and harms continues. This editorial seeks to understand why the controversy continues and how consensus can be achieved. Methods: ‘Position’ paper. Critical analysis and synthesis of relevant literature. Results: Advocates point at ADMs impressive effect size (number needed to treat, NNT = 6–8) in acute phase treatment and continuation/maintenance ADM treatment prevention relapse/recurrence in acute phase ADM responders (NNT = 3–4). Critics point at the limited clinically significant surplus value of ADMs relative to placebo and argue that effectiveness is overstated. We identified multiple factors that fuel the controversy: certainty of evidence is low to moderate; modest efficacy on top of strong placebo effects allows critics to focus on small net efficacy and advocates on large gross efficacy; ADM withdrawal symptoms masquerade as relapse/recurrence; lack of association between ADM treatment and long-term outcome in observational databases. Similar problems affect psychological treatments as well, but less so. We recommend four approaches to resolve the controversy: (1) placebo-controlled trials with relevant long-term outcome assessments, (2) inventive analyses of observational databases, (3) patient cohort studies including effect moderators to improve personalized treatment, and (4) psychological treatments as universal first-line treatment step. Conclusions: Given the public health significance of depression and increased long-term ADM usage, new approaches are needed to resolve the controversy.

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 · 10.1017/s0033291719003295

Cites

103 of 103 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?

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

2 of the 105 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ormel, J., Spinhoven, P., de Vries, Y. A., Cramer, A. O. J., Siegle, G. J., Bockting, C. L. H., & Hollon, S. D.
Affiliations
  • Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (NL)
  • Leiden University (NL)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Vanderbilt University (US)
Corresponding author
Ormel, Johan
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2019-11-29
Volume
50
Issue
2
Pages
177-186
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2991358494
Cited by
22
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 7
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KNAW Research Portal (The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (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
antidepressants, depression, antidepressant efficacy, placebo response, relapse prevention, long-term outcomes, antidepressant withdrawal symptoms, psychological intervention, quality of evidence, number needed to treat
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Depressive Disorder, Major, Major Depressive Disorder, Humans, Long-Term Care, Psychotherapy, Recurrence, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Secondary Prevention

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