Cited by 165Sleep and related disordersTreatment of Major DepressionCircadian rhythm and melatonin

Comparative Effects of Mirtazapine and Fluoxetine on Sleep Physiology Measures in Patients With Major Depression and Insomnia

Winokur, Andrew, DeMartinis, Nicholas A., McNally, Daniel P., Gary, Ellen M., Cormier, Jennifer L., Gary, Keith A.·2003·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Sleep complaints are common in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Both MDD and antidepressant drugs characteristically alter objective sleep measures. This study compares the effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine on sleep continuity measures in DSM-IV MDD patients with insomnia. Method Patients (N = 19) received initial baseline polysomnography evaluations over 2 consecutive nights. Subjects were randomly assigned to either fluoxetine (20-40 mg/day) or mirtazapine (15-45 mg/day) treatment for an 8-week, double-blind, double-dummy treatment trial. Single-night polysomnograms were conducted at weeks 1, 2, and 8, with depression ratings assessed at baseline and weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8. Statistical analysis was performed by repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Dunnet's post hoc analyses. Results Patients receiving mirtazapine (N = 8) had significant improvement in objective sleep physiology measures at 8 weeks. Improvements in sleep latency, sleep efficiency, and wake after sleep onset were significant after only 2 weeks of mirtazapine treatment. No significant changes in sleep continuity measures were observed in the fluoxetine group (N = 11). Both groups improved clinically in mood and subjective sleep measures from baseline, with no differences between groups. Conclusion These data demonstrate the differential effects of mirtazapine and fluoxetine, with significant improvement in favor of mirtazapine, on objective sleep parameters in MDD…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.v64n1013

Cites

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?

  • Evidence for efficacy of sedating low-dose antidepressants when used alone is relatively weak.

    “Evidence for their efficacy when used alone is relatively weak 38-42 and no specific agent within this group is recommended as preferable to the others in this group.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Winokur, A., DeMartinis, N. A., McNally, D. P., Gary, E. M., Cormier, J. L., & Gary, K. A.
Affiliations
UConn Health (US)
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2003-10-15
Volume
64
Issue
10
Pages
1224-1229
ISSN
0160-6689 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1984461780
Cited by
165
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 14
FWCI
13.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
Keywords
mirtazapine, fluoxetine, major depressive disorder, insomnia, sleep continuity, sleep latency, sleep efficiency, wake after sleep onset, antidepressant effects on sleep, polysomnography
MeSH terms
Mirtazapine, Adult, Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic, Major Depressive Disorder, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Double-Blind Method, Drug Administration Schedule, Female, Fluoxetine, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Male, Mianserin, Middle Aged, Treatment Outcome, Polysomnography, 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