Cited by 230Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Second Generation Antidepressants in Late-Life Depression: A Meta-Analysis of the Evidence

Nelson, J Craig, Delucchi, Kevin, Schneider, Lon S.·2008·The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.jgp.0000308883.64832.ed

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Late-life depression (LLD) is common and debilitating, with less frequent remission and more frequent recurrence following first-line antidepressant treatment compared to depression experienced earlier in life.

    “Late-life depression (LLD) is a common and debilitating condition, with less frequent remission and more frequent recurrence following first-line antidepressant treatment compared to depression experienced earlier in life1–7.”
  • In a meta-analysis of second-generation antidepressants versus placebo for late-life depression, response rates were 44% for antidepressant versus 35% for placebo.

    “A recent meta-analysis of second-generation antidepressants vs. placebo for treatment of LLD found that response rates were modest (44% for antidepressant vs. 35% for placebo)3.”
  • Discontinuation rates due to adverse events associated with second-generation antidepressant medication range from 8-27%, compared to 1-11% for placebo.

    “Discontinuation rates due to adverse events associated with second-generation antidepressant medication range from 8–27%, compared to 1–11% for placebo3.”
  • Response rates were higher for 10-12-week trials (55%) compared to 6-8-week trials (38%).

    “Response rates were higher for 10–12-week trials (55%) compared to 6–8-week trials (38%)3.”
  • Antidepressants are moderately effective in bringing about remission relative to pill placebo, with numbers needed to treat in the range of 8-13.

    “Antidepressants are moderately effective in bringing about remission relative to pill placebo, with numbers needed to treat in the range of 8‐13 218 .”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. American Psychiatric Association, 2000, Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder (revision), Am J Psychiatry, 157, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Nelson, J. C., Delucchi, K., & Schneider, L. S.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Nelson, J Craig
Venue
The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-07
Volume
16
Issue
7
Pages
558-567
ISSN
1064-7481 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4297888589
Cited by
230
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 15
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
second-generation antidepressants, geriatric depression, major depressive disorder, elderly patients, antidepressant efficacy, placebo response, remission, treatment discontinuation, adverse events, treatment duration

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