Posted by Jamal Spelling on January 6, 2008, at 15:10:29
In reply to Re: correlation does not imply causality » Jamal Spelling, posted by Larry Hoover on January 6, 2008, at 14:20:10
> Are you suggesting that if you followed a group of untreated subjects comprised of ~50% recurrent depressives, and ~30% chronic depressives, that after 56 weeks, 67% would be in full remission?
My main point is that STAR*D does not prove that the drug/CBT regimen used remits depression with a 67% success rate, yet that is what many people are claiming. One can only say that 67% of patients who follow this regimen will remit after 56 weeks, but not necessarily as a result of the regimen.
For example, a similarly comprised untreated group might have a remission rate of 40% after 56 weeks, which would imply that the STAR*D algorithm really only works for 26% of patients. Then the abstract would have to read something like "The study demonstrates that 26% of depression patients can be brought into remission by 56 weeks as a result of following the STAR*D algorithm". And that doesn't sound as good.
poster:Jamal Spelling
thread:804126
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20080105/msgs/804658.html