Journal of Psychopharmacology

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Leon, A. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nelson, J. C.
Right arrow Articles by Leon, A. C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Psychopharmacology, Vol. 20, No. 4 suppl, 47-53 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1359786806066046

Assessment of outcome in depression

J. Craig Nelson

Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA

Laura Portera

Munroe Township, Williamsport, NJ, USA

Andrew C. Leon

Department of Psychiatry, Weill Medical College, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Valid and reliable methods of assessing outcome in depression are crucial to antidepressant efficacy studies but are also important for all studies that relate response to other variables. In this paper we review basic issues of reliability and validity associated with outcome measurement. We distinguish between scales or inventories designed for screening or diagnosis and those intended for outcome assessment. We note historical changes in patient selection (e.g. outpatients instead of inpatients, differentiating psychotic and non-psychotic) and how these changes affect commonly used scales such as the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. We examine whether antidepressants with different mechanisms of action are best assessed with similar or different symptoms. And we review studies that have identified 'core' symptoms of depression and compare these findings to the magnitude of individual symptom change we found in five studies of selective serotonergic or nonadrenergic antidepressants.

Key Words: major depression • assessment • rating scales • core symptoms • antidepressant response


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Arch Intern MedHome page
S. L. West, A. A. D'Aloisio, R. P. Agans, W. D. Kalsbeek, N. N. Borisov, and J. M. Thorp
Prevalence of Low Sexual Desire and Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in a Nationally Representative Sample of US Women
Arch Intern Med, July 14, 2008; 168(13): 1441 - 1449.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]