CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 115Treatment of Major DepressionMental Health Treatment and AccessAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D): Part 2: Study Outcomes

Howland, Robert H.·2008·Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services
DOI 10.3928/02793695-20081001-05
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article reviews the main outcome findings from the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) study. The study compared the efficacy and tolerability of a range of antidepressant therapies through four sequential levels of treatment with the goal of achieving remission. Remission rates based on the primary outcome measure (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) were 28% (Level 1 citalopram), 17% to 30% (Level 2 treatments), 12% to 25% (Level 3 treatments), and 7% to 14% (Level 4 treatments). For patients not responding adequately to an initial trial of citalopram, subsequent treatment strategies may be effective. When more treatment steps are required, however, lower acute remission rates, greater degrees of treatment intolerance, and higher relapse rates during follow up are seen. There were few differences among treatments within each level related to efficacy or tolerability, although patients had clear preferences for or against certain treatments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3928/02793695-20081001-05

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.7.1161 · DOI
  2. Gilmer, W.S., Gollan, J.K., Wisniewski, S.R., Howland, R.H., Trivedi, M.H., Miyahara, S., . (in press). Does the duration of index episode affect the treatment outcome of major depressive disorder? A STAR*D report. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 115

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Howland, R. H.
Affiliations
University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Howland, Robert H.
ORCID
Howland, Robert H.
Venue
Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services
Publisher
SLACK, Inc.
Published
2008-10
Volume
46
Issue
10
Pages
21-24
ISSN
  • 0279-3695 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-2413
DOI
10.3928/02793695-20081001-05
OpenAlex
W146502225
Cited by
115
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosocial Nursing and Mental Health Services (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
depression, antidepressants, STAR*D, sequential therapy, citalopram, remission, treatment response, treatment intolerance, relapse, patient preferences, antidepressant efficacy
MeSH terms
Antidepressive Agents, Combined Modality Therapy, Depressive Disorder, Humans, Remission Induction, Research Design, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome

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