Cited by 52Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTreatment of Major DepressionPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Defining Response and Remission in Anxiety Disorders: Toward an Integrated Approach

Bandelow, Borwin·2006·CNS Spectrums

Abstract

Response and remission rates are commonly used to evaluate the efficacy of treatments for anxiety disorders and other psychiatric illnesses. Response is generally regarded as a clinically meaningful improvement in symptoms, while remission, the goal of treatment, is generally thought of as the absence or near absence of symptoms following illness, accompanied by a return to premorbid levels of functioning. Response and remission are often defined using psychiatric rating scales, based on score cutoffs or the magnitude of score changes from baseline. While no universally accepted criteria exist, a commonly used threshold for response is a > 50% improvement in the total score, while for remission, various cutoff points have been used. Comparison of cutoffs or change scores for disease-specific scales with Clinical Global Impressions ratings is a useful way of evaluating response and remission criteria across disorders. To illustrate the use of disease-specific and global measures, this article summarizes data from randomized, placebo-controlled studies of adult patients with generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, or panic disorder treated with the serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor venlafaxine extended release, for which acute-phase data are available (a total of 13 trials).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1092852900025815

Cites

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?

  • There is no unequivocal definition of treatment-resistant panic disorder, and very heterogeneous criteria have been used across studies, making interpretation of results uncertain.

    “Currently, there is no unequivocal definition of TRPD. Very heterogeneous criteria have been used across different studies, making interpretation of the results uncertain.”

    From Management of Treatment-Resistant Panic Disorder (2017) · cites this paper as [25]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 52

Authors
Bandelow, B.
Affiliations
University of Göttingen (DE)
Corresponding author
Bandelow, Borwin
Venue
CNS Spectrums
Published
2006
Volume
11
Issue
S12
Pages
21-28
ISSN
  • 1092-8529 (ISSN-L)
  • 2165-6509
OpenAlex
W2437129297
Cited by
52
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • CNS Spectrums (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • GRO (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
anxiety disorders, treatment response, remission, response criteria, remission criteria, psychiatric rating scales, Clinical Global Impression Scale, generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, venlafaxine extended release, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Venlafaxine Hydrochloride, Anxiety Disorders, Cyclohexanols, Delayed-Action Preparations, Humans, Personality Assessment, Personality Inventory, Anti-Anxiety Agents, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome

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