Cited by 39Treatment of Major DepressionAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMental Health Treatment and Access

Dose-response relationship of recent antidepressants in the short-term treatment of depression

Open access
Berney, Patricia·2005·Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract

Antidepressant drugs are widely recommended for the treatment of depressive disorders, and finding the "right dose for the right patient" is an important issue. Whatever antidepressant is prescribed, a proportion of adult patients with major depression fail to respond satisfactorily to adequate first-line treatment. A frequent strategy for patients with insufficient response to an initial antidepressant dose is to increase the dose. This review is about this strategy, ie, the possible benefits of prescribing higher doses of recent antidepressants. The results show that a flat dose-response curve is a class phenomenon for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), according to randomized, controlled, fixed-dose clinical trials. For the serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), the strategy of dose increase may be relevant for venlafaxine, in order to increase the number of responders. Thus, the subgroup of patients for whom high doses of SSRIs could be useful remains to be defined.

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 · 10.31887/dcns.2005.7.3/pberney

Cites

51 of 51 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?

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
Berney, P.
Affiliations
University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
Corresponding author
Berney, Patricia
Venue
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience
Published
2005-09-30
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
249-262
ISSN
  • 1294-8322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1958-5969
OpenAlex
W192041726
Cited by
39
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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 › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
antidepressants, dose-response relationship, major depressive disorder, dose escalation, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, venlafaxine, antidepressant response, treatment-resistant depression
MeSH terms
Adult, Antidepressive Agents, Depression, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Time Factors, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

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