Posted by cecilia on July 15, 2006, at 6:46:39
In reply to Re: couldn't have said it better myself, posted by SLS on July 15, 2006, at 5:58:14
Well, something about the study still doesn't make sense. The drugs used were common, frequently used AD's and yet presumably people wouldn't be allowed into the study if they had already tried them without success. Where did they find these people with chronic treatment resistant depression who had never tried any of the most frequently used meds? Still, it seems like this study did use a more varied population than most studies which have incredibly strict and specific criteria for inclusion. When I had rTMS in Canada it sounded like virtually everyone there had gone there because they had been refused inclusion in the rTMS study in my home city. I've never tried to get into a drug study, but I'm sure I'd be refused because I've tried so many meds, because I have anxiety as well as depression, because I have a number of medical problems with associated meds, and because my depression is chronic. (The latter was the stated reason I was refused the rTMS study.) Even though it was expensive and didn't work, I was just as glad to have the rTMS in Canada and not have to go through a possible "Sham" study. But anyway, I just think studies in general need to be reviewed to see how the selected population affects the results. It's no surprise for example that so many people here on Emsam reported anxiety and insomnia-the Emsam studies were testing for depression and specifically excluded participants with anxiety. Cecilia
poster:cecilia
thread:662854
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060709/msgs/667225.html