Posted by jhj on September 3, 2007, at 0:50:48
In reply to Re: To the people who don't believe in biological dep. » jhj, posted by FredPotter on September 2, 2007, at 15:48:55
It is not amount to slavishly believing in institute's work.It is the details of the study that makes one to believe the findings.And lots of money and efforts have gone into these.Read the following things again about the study.What were the goals of the STAR*D trial?
A. The overall goal of the STAR*D trial was to assess the effectiveness of depression treatments in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder, in both primary and specialty care settings. It is the largest and longest study ever conducted to evaluate depression treatment. Read more about STAR*D.Each of the four levels of the study tested a different medication or medication combination. The primary goal of each level was to determine if the treatment used during that level could adequately treat participants' major depressive disorder (MDD). Those who did not become symptom-free could proceed to the next level of treatment.
The design of the STAR*D study reflects what is done in clinical practice because it allowed study participants to choose certain treatment strategies most acceptable to them and limited the randomization of each participant only to his/her range of acceptable treatment strategies. No prior studies have evaluated the different treatment strategies in broadly defined participant groups treated in diverse care settings.
2. Who participated in the study?
A. Over a seven-year period, the study enrolled 4,041 outpatients, ages 18-75 years, from 41 clinical sites around the country, which included both specialty care settings and primary medical care settings. Participants represented a broad range of ethnic and socioeconomic groups. All participants were diagnosed with MDD and were already seeking care at one of these sites. No media advertisements were used to recruit participants. Instead, they were referred to the trial by their doctors.So that results could be generalized to a broad group of real-world patients, most adults with MDD were eligible. People were not eligible for the study if they had not tolerated or did not get well with one or more of the treatments that were part of the first two STAR*D treatment steps, or if a STAR*D treatment could not be safely used because of another medical condition or because they were taking certain other medications. In addition, people with substance abuse disorders that required detoxification, anorexia or bulimia, or obsessive compulsive disorder were not eligible for the study because they required treatments that were not part of STAR*D.
Of the initial 4,041 participants, 1,165 were excluded because they either did not meet the study requirements of having "at least moderate" depression (based on a rating scale used in the study) or they chose not to participate. Thus, 2,876 "evaluable" people were included in level 1 results. Level 2 results include 1,439 people who did not become symptom-free in level 1 and chose to continue. Level 3 results include 377 people, and Level 4 results include 142 people
If you have conducted any longer study then this one and on a larger group,then you are most welcome to challange the study and declare your findings.Merely searching google does not make one good enough to review such huge study.It is insult to the people involved and also,total lack of appreciation of the money used in the study.As far as Lancet is concerned i am sorry to say this. Though i have read its many articles,very few people in my country knows about it and same is the case with China.India and China have 30% of world popultation.If you think that the journal about which 1/3 of population on earth have not even heard can be called "reputed",then i have no problem.
poster:jhj
thread:775476
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20070831/msgs/780487.html