Posted by linkadge on July 16, 2006, at 18:57:42
In reply to Re: couldn't have said it better myself » linkadge, posted by SLS on July 16, 2006, at 6:41:21
>I believe I've already addressed this issue in >previous posts. I have seen other abstracts on >Medline and elsewhere reporting that clinical >trials of antidepressants using rigid criteria >allowing only the more severe cases of MDD >demonstrate lower placebo response rates and >greater superiority for putative antidepressants.
Oh of course you'll find a few studies that suggest this.
>The following paper describes the failure of >trials with high placebo response rates to >demonstrate superiority of antidepressants, but >not those with low placebo response rates.
Clearly
>It is my contention that high placebo response >rates are indicative of poorly designed >inclusion criteria that allow people who do not >have true MDD to enter the studies.
When you're faced with the fact that overall the antidepressant effect vs. placebo is weak, it becomes natural to want to try and come up with reasons why.
>I feel that
>this is more of a problem today than it was 20 >years ago. I believe this is due to the increase >in monetary pressure to produce subjects for >clinical trials. This is born out by the >steadily increasing rate of placebo response >observed in these studies over the years.Do you have any data to support this? There are certainly other possable reasons why placebo response may have increased over the years.
Show me data to suggest that increased sevarity of depression has a higher ratio of active treatment to placebo response.
Linkadge
poster:linkadge
thread:662854
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060709/msgs/667569.html