Cited by 217Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA): week 24 outcomes

Open access
Emslie, Graham J., Mayes, Taryn, Porta, Giovanna, Vitiello, Benedetto, Clarke, Greg, Wagner, Karen Dineen, Asarnow, Joan Rosenbaum, Spirito, Anthony +11 more·2010·American Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report on the outcome of participants in the Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA) trial after 24 weeks of treatment, including remission and relapse rates and predictors of treatment outcome. METHOD: Adolescents (ages 12-18 years) with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI)-resistant depression were randomly assigned to either a medication switch alone (alternate SSRI or venlafaxine) or a medication switch plus cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). At week 12, responders could continue in their assigned treatment arm and nonresponders received open treatment (medication and/or CBT) for 12 more weeks (24 weeks total). The primary outcomes were remission and relapse, defined by the Adolescent Longitudinal Interval Follow-Up Evaluation as rated by an independent evaluator. RESULTS: Of 334 adolescents enrolled in the study, 38.9% achieved remission by 24 weeks, and initial treatment assignment did not affect rates of remission. Likelihood of remission was much higher (61.6% versus 18.3%) and time to remission was much faster among those who had already demonstrated clinical response by week 12. Remission was also higher among those with lower baseline depression, hopelessness, and self-reported anxiety. At week 12, lower depression, hopelessness, anxiety, suicidal ideation, family conflict, and absence of comorbid dysthymia, anxiety, and drug/alcohol use and impairment also predicted remission. Of those who responded by week 12, 19.6% had a relapse of depression by week 24. CONCLUSIONS: Continued treatment for depression among treatment-resistant adolescents results in remission in approximately one-third of patients, similar to adults. Eventual remission is evident within the first 6 weeks in many, suggesting that earlier intervention among nonresponders could be important.

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 · 10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.09040552

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • TORDIA had high risk of bias for blinding of participants/care providers because participants were blind to medication type but unlikely to be blind if receiving adjunctive CBT.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Blinding of partici- pants/care providers | High risk | 'Participants were blind to medication type'. NB: unlikely that participants were blind if receiving adjunctive CBT treatment. pg. 785 (Emslie 2010)”
  • TORDIA had low risk of bias for blinding of outcome assessors because independent evaluators were blind to medication type and CBT treatment.

    “Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Blinding of outcome as- | Low risk | 'independent evaluators were blind to medication type. Independent evalua- tors were also blind to CBT treatment'”
  • In TORDIA, blinding of the independent evaluator was compromised in 64 cases, most commonly because of participant disclosure of receiving CBT.

    “NB: 'In 64 cases, the blinding of the independent evaluator was compromised, most commonly because of participant disclosure of receiving CBT'. pg. 785 (Emslie 2010)”

    From Interventions for preventing relapse and recurrence of a depressive disorder in children and adolescents (2012) · cites this paper as Emslie 2010

    The Method > Study Design passage says independent evaluators were blind to CBT assignment, but it does not report 64 breaches of that blinding or identify participant disclosure as their most common cause. Searches for the quoted wording, evaluator unblinding, and “64” found no passage in our copy establishing those details; the available passages have no page labels. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [7]Kennard BD Clarke GN Weersing VR Asarnow JR Shamseddeen W Porta G Berk M Hughes JL Spirito A Emslie GJ Keller MB Wagner KD Brent DA Effective components of TORDIA cognitive behavioral therapy or adolescent depression J Consult Clin Psychol 2009 77 1033 1041 19968380 PMC3705725
  2. [23]Asarnow JR Emslie G Clarke G Wagner KD Spirito A Vitiello B Iyengar S Shamseddeen W Ritz L McCracken J Strober M Suddath R Leonard H Porta G Keller M Brent D Treatment of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression in adolescents: predictors and moderators of treatment response J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2009 48 330 339 19182688 PMC2754157

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Emslie, G. J., Mayes, T., Porta, G., Vitiello, B., Clarke, G., Wagner, K. D., Asarnow, J. R., Spirito, A., Birmaher, B., Ryan, N., Kennard, B., DeBar, L., McCracken, J., Strober, M., Onorato, M., Zelazny, J., Keller, M., Iyengar, S., & Brent, D.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (US)
  • Suburban Hospital (US)
Venue
American Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2010-07-01
Volume
167
Issue
7
Pages
782-791
ISSN
  • 0002-953X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-7228
OpenAlex
W2140498388
Cited by
217
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 24
FWCI
12.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH61958, U01MH061856, MH-66371, U01MH061835, U01MH061869, MH-61869, U01MH062014, MH61856, MH-61835, MH61864, U01MH061958, P30MH066371, U01MH061864, MH62014)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
treatment-resistant depression, adolescent depression, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, venlafaxine, cognitive behavioral therapy, remission, relapse, predictors of treatment outcome, hopelessness, suicidal ideation, family conflict, anxiety comorbidity, early intervention
MeSH terms
Venlafaxine Hydrochloride, Adolescent, Combined Modality Therapy, Cyclohexanols, Depressive Disorder, Female, Fluoxetine, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Remission Induction, Time Factors, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Failure, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation

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