Moncrieff J, Wessely S, Hardy R
Psychiatry, University College London, Warley hospital, Mascalls Lane, Brentwood, Essex, UK, CM14 4TU.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;2004(1):CD003012. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003012.pub2.
Although there is a consensus that antidepressants are effective in depression, placebo effects are also thought to be substantial. Side effects of antidepressants may reveal the identity of medication to participants or investigators and thus may bias the results of conventional trials using inert placebos. Using an 'active' placebo which mimics some of the side effects of antidepressants may help to counteract this potential bias.
To investigate the efficacy of antidepressants when compared with 'active' placebos.
The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis review groups's search strategy was used to search MEDLINE (1966-2000), PsychLIT (1980-2000) and EMBASE (1974-2000) and this was last done in July 2000. Reference lists from relevant articles and textbooks were searched and 12 specialist journals were handsearched up to 1996.
Randomised and quasi randomised controlled trials comparing antidepressants with active placebos in people with depression.
Since many different outcome measures were used a standard measure of effect was calculated for each trial. A subgroup analysis of inpatient and outpatient trials was conducted. Two reviewers independently assessed whether each trial met inclusion criteria.
Nine studies involving 751 participants were included. Two of them produced effect sizes which showed a consistent and statistically significant difference in favour of the active drug. Combining all studies produced a pooled estimate of effect of 0.39 standard deviations (confidence interval, 0.24 to 0.54) in favour of the antidepressant measured by improvement in mood. There was high heterogeneity due to one strongly positive trial. Sensitivity analysis omitting this trial reduced the pooled effect to 0.17 (0.00 to 0.34). The pooled effect for inpatient and outpatient trials was highly sensitive to decisions about which combination of data was included but inpatient trials produced the lowest effects.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: The more conservative estimates from the present analysis found that differences between antidepressants and active placebos were small. This suggests that unblinding effects may inflate the efficacy of antidepressants in trials using inert placebos. Further research into unblinding is warranted.
尽管人们普遍认为抗抑郁药对抑郁症有效,但安慰剂效应也被认为相当显著。抗抑郁药的副作用可能会向受试者或研究者暴露药物的身份,从而可能使使用惰性安慰剂的传统试验结果产生偏差。使用模拟抗抑郁药某些副作用的“活性”安慰剂可能有助于抵消这种潜在的偏差。
研究与“活性”安慰剂相比,抗抑郁药的疗效。
采用Cochrane协作网抑郁、焦虑与神经症综述小组的检索策略,检索MEDLINE(1966 - 2000年)、PsychLIT(1980 - 2000年)和EMBASE(1974 - 2000年),最近一次检索时间为2000年7月。检索了相关文章和教科书的参考文献列表,并手工检索了12种专业期刊直至1996年。
比较抗抑郁药与活性安慰剂治疗抑郁症患者的随机和半随机对照试验。
由于使用了许多不同的结局指标,为每个试验计算了一个标准效应量。对住院和门诊试验进行了亚组分析。两名评价者独立评估每个试验是否符合纳入标准。
纳入了9项研究,共751名受试者。其中两项研究得出的效应量显示活性药物具有一致且具有统计学意义的优势。综合所有研究,通过情绪改善衡量,支持抗抑郁药的合并效应估计值为0.39个标准差(置信区间,0.24至0.54)。由于一项结果强烈为阳性的试验,存在高度异质性。排除该试验的敏感性分析将合并效应降至0.17(0.00至0.34)。住院和门诊试验的合并效应高度依赖于关于纳入哪些数据组合的决定,但住院试验产生的效应最低。
本分析中较为保守的估计发现,抗抑郁药与活性安慰剂之间的差异较小。这表明在使用惰性安慰剂的试验中,非盲法效应可能夸大了抗抑郁药的疗效。有必要对非盲法进行进一步研究。