Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 306

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 122 of the 122 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Treatment discontinuation with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants: a meta-analysis

Open access
Anderson, I M, Tomenson, B M·1995·BMJ

Abstract

Objective : To assess treatment discontinuation rates with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants. Design : Meta-analysis of 62 randomised controlled trials. Subjects : 6029 patients with major unipolar depression. Main outcome measures : Pooled risk ratios for drop out rates with respect to all cases of discontinuation and those due to side effects and treatment failure. Results : The total discontinuation rate was 10% lower with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors than with tricyclic antidepressants (risk ratio 0.90; 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 0.97) and the drop out rate due to side effects was 25% lower (risk ratio 0.75; 0.66 to 0.84). There was no significant difference between drug classes in the drop out rates for treatment failure. The risk ratios for drop out did not differ significantly between individual selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Conclusions : Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are better tolerated than tricyclic antidepressants as measured by total numbers of drop outs. The definite advantage to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors is explained by fewer drop outs due to side effects. The overall difference, however, is comparatively small and may not be clinically relevant. Analyses of cost effectiveness should not overestimate the advantage to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Key messages: Key messages In a meta-analysis of randomised, short term clinical trials selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors were associated with 10% fewer overall drop outs than tricyclic antidepressants (nine drop outs for every 10 with tricyclic agents) This difference was accounted for by a lower rate of drop out related to side effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (25% reduction; three drop outs for every four with tricyclic agents) This comparatively small difference in drop out rate is of uncertain importance clinically and when cost effectiveness is considered Further studies of the tolerability of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with that of tricyclic antidepressants are required over a longer period in the setting of clinical practice rather than clinical trials

Overview

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 · 10.1136/bmj.310.6992.1433

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 122 references

Cited by

See all 306

Metadata

Authors
Anderson, I. M., & Tomenson, B. M.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1995-06-03
Volume
310
Issue
6992
Pages
1433-1438
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2048361493
Cited by
306
References
122
FWCI
7.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Treatment discontinuation with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants: a meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.310.6992.1433
The paper
Anderson, I. M., & Tomenson, B. M. (1995). Treatment discontinuation with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors compared with tricyclic antidepressants: a meta-analysis. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.310.6992.1433

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.