Cited by 73Psychotherapy Techniques and ApplicationsMental Health Treatment and AccessTreatment of Major Depression

Should treatment for depression be based more on patient preference?

Open access
Winter, Sophia, Barber, Jacques·2013·Patient Preference and Adherence

Abstract

Patient treatment preferences are of growing interest to researchers, clinicians, and patients. In this review, an overview of the most commonly recommended treatments for depression is provided, along with a brief review of the evidence supporting their efficacy. Studies examining the effect of patient treatment preferences on treatment course and outcome are summarized. Existing literature on what treatment options patients tend to prefer and believe to be helpful, and what factors may affect these preferences, is also reviewed. Finally, clinical implications of research findings on patient preferences for depression management are discussed. In summary, although our knowledge of the impact of patient preferences on treatment course and outcome is limited, knowing and considering those preferences may be clinically important and worthy of greater study for evidence-based practice.

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 · 10.2147/ppa.s52746

Cites

89 of 89 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?

  • Digital phenotyping offers a powerful approach for forecasting risk for suicidal ideation over time.

    “Digital phenotyping offers a powerful approach for forecasting risk for suicidal ideation over time.”

    From Digital health technologies and major depressive disorder (2023) · cites this paper as [140]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Winter, S., & Barber, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Tennessee at Knoxville (US)
  • Adelphi University (US)
Corresponding author
Winter, Sophia
Venue
Patient Preference and Adherence
Published
2013-10
Volume
7
Pages
1047
ISSN
1177-889X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1978031143
Cited by
73
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Patient Preference and Adherence (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Dove Medical Press (Taylor and Francis Group) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
depression, patient treatment preferences, antidepressant treatment, medication adherence, treatment outcomes, evidence-based practice

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