Cited by 396Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) Trial: A Review

Sinyor, Mark, Schaffer, Ayal, Levitt, Anthony·2010·The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective The Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial is the largest open-label, pragmatic trial that has been undertaken to examine the treatment of major depressive disorder. At a cost of US$35 million over 6 years, STAR*D sought to test the effectiveness both of pharmacotherapy and of cognitive therapy, and to ascertain whether certain treatments are more optimal after one or more failed trials. Method Patients (n = 2876) who presented to either a psychiatry or family practice setting seeking treatment for depression were included in the STAR*D analysis. In the 4 levels of STAR*D, patients were randomized to various treatment monotherapies, combinations, or augmentation strategies. The primary outcome was remission, based on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Secondary outcomes were response, as measured by clinician and patient self-report as well as various measures of patients' level of function and (or) quality of life. Results Remission rates for treatment levels 1 to 2 and 3 to 4 were 18% to 30% and 7% to 25%, respectively. There was no difference in effectiveness between any treatments at any treatment level. Patients with longer index episodes, more concurrent psychiatric or general medical disorders, and (or) lower measures of baseline function were less likely to achieve remission. There were no major differences between outcomes in patients treated in primary, compared with specialist care, nor were there significant differences…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/070674371005500303

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sinyor, M., Schaffer, A., & Levitt, A.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
Corresponding author
Schaffer, Ayal
Venue
The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry
Published
2010-03
Volume
55
Issue
3
Pages
126-135
ISSN
  • 0706-7437 (ISSN-L)
  • 1497-0015
OpenAlex
W496281
Cited by
396
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 14
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Sanofi
  • AstraZeneca Canada
  • Servier
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
major depressive disorder, STAR*D trial, antidepressant treatment, cognitive therapy, treatment-resistant depression, treatment sequencing, remission, treatment response, augmentation strategies, primary care versus specialist care, quality of life, functional outcome
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Antidepressive Agents, Clinical Trials as Topic, Combined Modality Therapy, Depressive Disorder, Drug Administration Schedule, Drug Therapy, Combination, Humans, Middle Aged, Primary Health Care, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Quality of Life, Recurrence, Remission Induction, Research Design, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

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